Lacosamide in the general population and in people with intellectual disability: Similar responses?

Efficacy and tolerability of Brivaracetam in people with intellectual disability compared to those without intellectual disability

INTRODUCTION

In England, nearly a quarter of people with intellectual disability (PwID) have epilepsy. Though 70 % of PwID have pharmaco-resistant seizures only 10 % are prescribed anti-seizure medication (ASMs) licenced for pharmaco-resistance. Brivaracetam (BRV) licenced in 2016 has had nine post-marketing studies involving PwID. These studies are limited either by lack of controls or not looking at outcomes based on differing levels of ID severity. This study looks at evidence comparing effectiveness and side-effects in PwID to those without ID prescribed Brivaracetam (BRV).

METHODS

Pooled case note data for patients prescribed BRV (2016-2022) at 12 UK NHS Trusts were analysed. Demographics, starting and maximum dose, side-effects, dropouts and seizure frequency between ID (mild vs. moderate-profound (M/P)) and general population for a 12-month period were compared. Descriptive analysis, Mann-Whitney, Fisher's exact and logistic regression methods were employed.

RESULTS

37 PwID (mild 17 M/P 20) were compared to 102 without ID. Mean start and maximum dose was lower for PwID than non-ID. Mean maximum dose reduced slightly with ID severity. No difference was found between ID and non-ID or between ID groups (Mild vs M/P) in BRV's efficacy i.e. >50 % seizure reduction or tolerability. Mental and behavioural side-effects were more prevalent for PwID (27.0 % ID, 17.6 % no ID) but not significantly higher (P = 0.441) or associated with ID severity (p = 0.255).

CONCLUSION

This is the first study on BRV, which compares ID cohorts with differing severity and non-ID. Efficacy, tolerability and side-effects reported are similar across differing ID severity to those with no ID.

Efficacy and tolerability of levetiracetam in people with and without intellectual disabilities: A naturalistic case control study

INTRODUCTION

People with Intellectual Disabilities (PwID) are twenty times more likely than general population to have epilepsy. Guidance for prescribing antiseizure medication (ASM) to PwID is driven by trials excluding them. Levetiracetam (LEV) is a first-line ASM in the UK. Concerns exist regarding LEV's behavioural and psychological adverse effects, particularly in PwID. There is no high-quality evidence comparing effectiveness and adverse effects in PwID to those without, prescribed LEV.

METHODS

Pooled casenote data for patients prescribed LEV (2000-2020) at 18 UK NHS Trusts were analysed. Demographics, starting and maximum dose, adverse effects, dropouts and seizure frequency between ID (mild vs. moderate-profound (M/P)) and general population for a 12-month period were compared. Descriptive analysis, Mann-Whitney, Fisher's exact and logistic regression methods were employed.

RESULTS

173 PwID (mild 53 M/P 120) were compared to 200 without ID. Mean start and maximum dose were similar across all groups. PwID (Mild & M/P) were less likely to withdraw from treatment (P = 0.036). No difference was found between ID and non-ID or between ID groups (Mild vs M/P) in LEV's efficacy i.e. >50 % seizure reduction. Significant association emerged between ID severity and psychiatric adverse effects (P = 0.035). More irritability (14.2 %) and aggression (10.8 %) were reported in M/P PwID.

CONCLUSION

PwID and epilepsy have high rates of premature mortality, comorbidities, treatment resistance and polypharmacy but remain poorly researched for ASM use. This is the largest studied cohort of PwID trialled on LEV compared to general population controls. Findings support prescribing of LEV for PwID as a first-line ASM.

Rapid switching from levetiracetam to brivaracetam in pharmaco-resistant epilepsy in people with and without intellectual disabilities: a naturalistic case control study

BACKGROUND

Approximately one quarter of people with an intellectual disability (PwID) have epilepsy of whom nearly three-quarters are pharmaco-resistant. There are higher reported neuropsychiatric side-effects to anti-seizure medication (ASM) in this group. Levetiracetam (LEV) is a first-line ASM with a stronger association with neuropsychiatric symptoms for PwID than other ASMs. Brivaracetam (BRV) is a newer ASM. Recent studies suggest a beneficial effect of swapping people who experience neuropsychiatric events with LEV to BRV. However, there is limited evidence of this for PwID. This evaluation analyses real world outcomes of LEV to BRV swap for PwID compared to those without ID.

METHODS

We performed a multicentre, retrospective review of clinical records. Demographic, clinical characteristics and reported adverse events of patients switched from LEV to BRV (2016-2020) were recorded at 3 months pre and 6- and 12-month post-BRV initiation. Outcomes were compared between PwID and those without and summarised using cross-tabulations and logistic regression models. A Bonferroni correction was applied.

RESULTS

Of 77 participants, 46 had ID and 52% had a past psychiatric illness. 71% participants switched overnight from LEV to BRV. Seizure reduction of > 50% was seen in 40% patients. Psychiatric illness history was predictive of having neuropsychiatric side-effects with LEV but not BRV (p = 0.001). There was no significant difference for any primary outcomes between PwID versus without ID.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching from LEV to BRV appears as well tolerated and efficacious in PwID as those without ID with over 90% still on BRV after 12 months.

Patterns of antiseizure medications prescribing in people with intellectual disability and epilepsy: A narrative review and analysis

People with intellectual disabilities (PwID) have a bidirectional relationship with epilepsy. Nearly 25% of PwID have seizures and 30% people with epilepsy are thought to have a significant intellectual impairment. Furthermore, 70% of PwID are thought to have treatment-resistant epilepsy. In the United Kingdom, antiseizure medications (ASMs) are the second most widely prescribed psychotropic agent for PwID. However, it is unclear what the current evidence and patterns is on current prescribing of ASMs, including when and how a case is made to withdraw them. A narrative review along with an analysis of large-scale NHS Digital published data (2015-2020) on several aspects of ASM prescribing by general practices for PwID was undertaken. The review results and data analysis are consolidated and presented as 11 themes to provide a comprehensive overview of the study topic. Recent studies estimate that one-third and one-fifth of PwID are prescribed ASMs. A history of epilepsy is seen as the primary prescribing reason; however, often it is a legacy, and the indication is no longer clear. The proportion receiving ASMs continues to rise with age. This pattern of use does not correlate well with seizure onset. There are limited data on de-prescribing ASMs in PwID. The study population heterogenicity, associated polypharmacy, multimorbidity and higher sudden unexpected death in epilepsy risks are outlined. Suggestions are made from available evidence for improving prescribing practices for PwID and seizures, and key areas for further research in this complex clinical area are outlined.

Psychobehavioural and Cognitive Adverse Events of Anti-Seizure Medications for the Treatment of Developmental and Epileptic Encephalopathies

The developmental and epileptic encephalopathies encompass a group of rare syndromes characterised by severe drug-resistant epilepsy with onset in childhood and significant neurodevelopmental comorbidities. The latter include intellectual disability, developmental delay, behavioural problems including attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder, psychiatric problems including anxiety and depression, speech impairment and sleep problems. Classical examples of developmental and epileptic encephalopathies include Dravet syndrome, Lennox-Gastaut syndrome and tuberous sclerosis complex. The mainstay of treatment is with multiple anti-seizure medications (ASMs); however, the ASMs themselves can be associated with psychobehavioural adverse events, and effects (negative or positive) on cognition and sleep. We have performed a targeted literature review of ASMs commonly used in the treatment of developmental and epileptic encephalopathies to discuss the latest evidence on their effects on behaviour, mood, cognition, sedation and sleep. The ASMs include valproate (VPA), clobazam, topiramate (TPM), cannabidiol (CBD), fenfluramine (FFA), levetiracetam (LEV), brivaracetam (BRV), zonisamide (ZNS), perampanel (PER), ethosuximide, stiripentol, lamotrigine (LTG), rufinamide, vigabatrin, lacosamide (LCM) and everolimus. Bromide, felbamate and other sodium channel ASMs are discussed briefly. Overall, the current evidence suggest that LEV, PER and to a lesser extent BRV are associated with psychobehavioural adverse events including aggressiveness and irritability; TPM and to a lesser extent ZNS are associated with language impairment and cognitive dulling/memory problems. Patients with a history of behavioural and psychiatric comorbidities may be more at risk of developing psychobehavioural adverse events. Topiramate and ZNS may be associated with negative effects in some aspects of cognition; CBD, FFA, LEV, BRV and LTG may have some positive effects, while the remaining ASMs do not appear to have a detrimental effect. All the ASMs are associated with sedation to a certain extent, which is pronounced during uptitration. Cannabidiol, PER and pregabalin may be associated with improvements in sleep, LTG is associated with insomnia, while VPA, TPM, LEV, ZNS and LCM do not appear to have detrimental effects. There was variability in the extent of evidence for each ASM: for many first-generation and some second-generation ASMs, there is scant documented evidence; however, their extensive use suggests favourable tolerability and safety (e.g. VPA); second-generation and some third-generation ASMs tend to have the most robust evidence documented over several years of use (TPM, LEV, PER, ZNS, BRV), while evidence is still being generated for newer ASMs such as CBD and FFA. Finally, we discuss how a variety of factors can affect mood, behaviour and cognition, and untangling the associations between the effects of the underlying syndrome and those of the ASMs can be challenging. In particular, there is enormous heterogeneity in cognitive, behavioural and developmental impairments that is complex and can change naturally over time; there is a lack of standardised instruments for evaluating these outcomes in developmental and epileptic encephalopathies, with a reliance on subjective evaluations by proxy (caregivers); and treatment regimes are complex involving multiple ASMs as well as other drugs.

Lacosamide effectiveness and tolerability in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy and severe disability under polytherapy: Therapy optimization as emerging from an observational study

OBJECTIVE

We explored the efficacy and safety of lacosamide combined with inhibitors of fast-inactivated sodium channels or with other antiepileptic drugs, in patients with drug refractory focal epilepsy associated with intellectual or psychiatric disability.

METHODS

Observational study of lacosamide including the monitoring of lacosamide trough plasma levels and of electroencephalograms.

RESULTS

We followed up 44 patients from the start of lacosamide therapy for up to 3 years, with a clinical, electroencephalogram (EEG), and pharmacological follow-up. Median patients' age was 32.7 years, median age at epilepsy onset was 3.5 years. Intellectual disability was severe in 55.4% of the cohort and drug refractoriness was diagnosed in 88.6% of patients, who had predominantly focal seizures (80%). The severity of their epilepsy was suggested by the use of combined therapies with non-sodium blockers and sodium blockers in 75% of patients. Lacosamide was added to previous therapies and up-titrated to a median of 300 mg/d. Lacosamide add-on led to simplification of the previous drug regimen with a dose reduction in 87.9% of users of sodium blockers and in 66.7% of users of non-sodium blockers, and to withdrawal of previously administered sodium blockers in 48.5% users and non-sodium blockers in 47.6% users. Lacosamide was prescribed at lower doses in the presence of oxcarbazepine (p = 0.029), lamotrigine (p = 0.015), and topiramate (p < 0.001). Mean lacosamide plasma levels were 6.0 ± 2.4 mg/L; they were in linear correlation with the administered dose (R² = 0.38, p < 0.001) and were influenced by the association with lamotrigine (p = 0.008), zonisamide (p = 0.012), and clobazam (p = 0.028). Lacosamide combination regimens led to an average reduction of 42% in baseline seizure frequency, with 50% patients reporting ≥50% seizure frequency reduction. Efficacy was directly correlated with lacosamide dose (R² = 0.47, p < 0.001, B = 0.53) and trough plasma levels (R² = 0.31, p < 0.001, B = 0.16). Electroencephalogram profiles were improved in 40.9% of patients and EEG improvement was not significantly correlated with seizure frequency reduction. Lacosamide safety was good, with 37 adverse reactions in 30 patients, of which 50% were attributed to lacosamide and led to lacosamide withdrawal in 18% of cases. The retention rate of lacosamide was of 88.6% at 1 year, 86.4% at 2 years, and 72.7% after three years. The severity of intellectual disability was directly correlated with increased possibility of lacosamide retention (OR = 0.46 per severity tier, p = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

Lacosamide add-on allowed dose reduction of previous therapies and reduced the frequency of seizures, showing good tolerability even at high doses, without exceeding reference plasma levels.

Effectiveness and safety of adjunctive cenobamate for focal seizures in adults with developmental disability treated in clinical practice

•

92.9% (26/28 patients) continued cenobamate through 6 months, showing high retention.

•

High responder rates/substantial focal seizure reduction occurred with cenobamate.

•

100% seizure reduction occurred in 48.2% of patients at 6 months.

•

Adverse effects were often mitigated by concomitant antiseizure medication reduction.

Effectiveness and tolerability of adjunctive cenobamate for uncontrolled focal seizures in adults living with a developmental disability are not defined. Retrospective medical record review included adults ≥18 years old living with a developmental disability, either in a group home or with parents, and experiencing uncontrolled focal seizures despite stable doses of ≥1 antiseizure medication (ASM). Effectiveness was examined as percentage change in focal seizure frequency per month from the 2-month average before cenobamate to the average of months 5 and 6 while receiving cenobamate. Percentages of patients achieving responder rates in focal seizure frequency at 6 months of cenobamate treatment were examined. Adverse effects and concomitant ASM dosage adjustments were assessed. Of the 28 included patients, 26 (92.9%) continued cenobamate beyond 6 months. The responder rate of 100% seizure reduction (seizure-free) occurred in 48.2% of the patients who continued cenobamate for 6 months. Ten adverse effects were reported in 9 patients (32.1%), and 80% (8/10) were resolved by reducing concomitant ASM dosages. Two patients (7.1%) discontinued cenobamate due to adverse effects. Cenobamate resulted in substantial reduction in focal seizure frequency and was well tolerated.

Eslicarbazepine acetate response in intellectual disability population versus general population

BACKGROUND

A quarter of people with intellectual disability (ID) have epilepsy, compared to approximately one in a hundred across the general population. Evidence for the safe and effective prescribing of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) for those with ID is, however, limited.

AIMS OF STUDY

This study seeks to strengthen the research evidence around Eslicarbazepine Acetate (ESL), a new AED, by comparing response of individuals with ID to those from the general population who do not have ID.

METHODS

A single data set was created through retrospective data collection from English and Welsh NHS Trusts. The UK-based Epilepsy Database Research Register (Ep-ID) data collection and analysis method were used.

RESULTS

Data were collected for 93 people (36 ID and 57 'no ID'). Seizure improvement of '>50%' was higher at 12 months for 'no ID' participants (56%), compared to ID participants (35%). Retention rates were slightly higher for those with ID (56% compared to 53%). Neither difference was significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Tolerance and Efficacy for ID and 'no ID' people in our data set were similar. Seizure improvement and retention rates were slightly lower than that found in other European data sets, but findings strengthen the evidence for the use of ESL in the ID population.

European perspective of perampanel response in people with Intellectual Disability

BACKGROUND

Epilepsy prevalence is over 20% for those with ID. It is difficult to diagnose and treat and more likely to be treatment resistant. The evidence informing prescribing is sparse, particularly for new drugs such as perampanel (PMP).

AIMS OF THE STUDY

This study seeks to strengthen the research evidence regarding PMP for people with ID by pooling information from two isolated and separately conducted studies: the UK-based Epilepsy Database Register (Ep-ID) and the data from the Kempenhaeghe clinic in the Netherlands.

METHODS

A single data set of comparable data was created and analysed under agreement and supervision of a UK statistician.

RESULTS

Seizure reduction within twelve months was evident in 62% of Dutch and 47% of UK patients. Retention rates were higher for those in the UK (P = .01) and for patients with moderate to profound ID, whilst side effects were more prominent in the Dutch cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Comparable rates of seizure reduction are in line with estimates for non-ID patients, adding to the evidence suggesting that PMP has a similar impact on those with ID. Taking a European perspective and sharing data across centres can help strengthen the evidence for prescribing antiepileptic drugs in the ID population.

Lacosamide in trigeminal neuralgia: report of a case refractory to first- and second-generation anticonvulsants

BACKGROUND

The treatment of trigeminal neuralgia (TN) involves first- and second-generation anticonvulsants. However, side effects (SEs) impair compliance with treatment, especially in elderly patients. Lacosamide (LCM) is a third-generation anticonvulsant with a mechanism of action that is not completely clear. It has few SEs and has been considered in the treatment of neuropathic pain.

CLINICAL PRESENTATION

LCM was prescribed as a monotherapy for a 60-year-old female with TN who had proven refractory to previous treatments in terms of both the absence of any pain relief and the appearance of severe leukopenia. The treatment dosage was 100 mg twice daily. Pain relief was obtained after three weeks of treatment without any SEs. Currently, the patient takes a maintenance dosage of 100 mg/daily, remaining in a state of complete well-being.

CONCLUSION

LCM has shown evidence of a potential efficacy and a good safety profile in the treatment of this patient with TN.