The relationship between antiepileptic drug load and challenging behaviors in older adults with intellectual disability and epilepsy

Relationship between anti-seizure medication and behaviors that challenge in older persons with intellectual disability and epilepsy: a review

INTRODUCTION

There is increased focus on the negative impact of the overprescribing of medication, specifically psychotropic medication, including anti-seizure medications (ASM), in people with Intellectual Disability (ID). This is particularly important for the older adult population, where multi-morbidity and polypharmacy are more common. ASMs are associated with psychiatric and behavioral adverse effects. Furthermore, there is growing awareness of the anticholinergic burden for older adults with epilepsy and ID and the relationship with behaviors that challenge (BtC).

AREAS COVERED

This review defines the older adult population and outlines the relationship between epilepsy and ID. BtC is outlined in the context of the population and the relationship with ASMs. The evidence base to guide prescribing and de-prescribing for newer ASMs is also presented, including pragmatic data.

EXPERT OPINION

Polypharmacy, particularly psychotropics, are a mortality risk factor for older adults with epilepsy and ID. Therefore, any BtC requires a holistic assessment with a multi-disciplinary approach. This includes specific consideration of all prescribed medicines in the context of polypharmacy. There should be routine reviews, at least annually, for those aged 40 years and over particularly focused on anticholinergic burden and/or polypharmacy.

Rest-Activity Rhythm Phenotypes in Adults with Epilepsy and Intellectual Disability

Objective

Sleep and rest-activity rhythms (RARs) are perturbed in many forms of neuropsychiatric illness. In this study, we applied wrist actigraphy to describe the extent of RAR perturbations in adults with epilepsy and intellectual disability ("E+ID"), using a cross-sectional case-control design. We examined whether RAR phenotypes correlated with epilepsy severity, deficits in adaptive function and/or comorbid psychopathology.

Methods

Primary caregivers of E+ID adults provided informed consent during routine ambulatory clinic visits and were asked to complete standardized surveys of overall epilepsy severity (GASE, Global Assessment of Severity of Epilepsy), adaptive function (ABAS-3, Adaptive Behavior Assessment System-3) and psychopathology (ABCL, Adult Behavior Checklist). Caregivers were also asked to ensure that subjects wore an Actiwatch-2 device continuously on their nondominant wrist for at least ten days. From recorded actograms, we calculated RAR amplitude, acrophase, robustness, intradaily variability (IV), interdaily stability (IS) and estimates of sleep quantity and timing. We compared these RAR metrics against those from (i) a previously published cohort of adults with epilepsy without ID (E-ID), and (ii) a cohort of age- and sex-matched intellectually able subjects measured within the Study of Latinos (SOL) Ancillary actigraphy study (SOL). Within E+ID subjects, we applied k-means analysis to divide subjects into three actigraphically distinct clusters.

Results

46 E+ID subjects (median age 26 [20-68], 47% female) provided a median recording duration of 11 days [range 6-27]. Surveys reflected low to extremely low levels of adaptive function (ABAS3 General Adaptive Composite score: median 50 [49-75]), and low/subclinical levels of psychopathology (ABCL total score: median 54.5 [25-67]). Compared with E-ID (n=57) and SOL (n=156) cohorts, E+ID subjects displayed significantly lower RAR amplitude, robustness and IS, with significantly higher IV and total daily sleep. K-means clustering of E+ID subjects recognized an intermediate cluster "B", with RAR values indistinguishable to E-ID. Cluster "A" subjects displayed pronounced hypoactivity and hypersomnia with high rates of rhythm fragmentation, while cluster "C" subjects featured hyper-robust and high amplitude RARs. All three clusters were similar in age, body mass index, antiseizure medication (ASM) polytherapy, ABAS3 and ABCL scores. We qualitatively describe RAR examples from all three clusters.

Interpretation

We show that adults with epilepsy and intellectual disability display a wide spectrum of RAR phenotypes that do not neatly correlate with measures of adaptive function or epilepsy severity. Prospective studies are necessary to determine whether continuous actigraphic monitoring can sensitively capture changes in chronobiological health that may arise with disease progression, iatrogenesis (e.g., ASM toxicity) or acute health deteriorations (e.g., seizure exacerbation, pneumonia). Similar long-term data is necessary to recognize whether behavioral interventions targeted to 'normalize' RARs may promote improvements in adaptive function and therapy engagement.

Drug burden index of people ageing with intellectual disability and cognitive complaints attending a specialist memory service

BACKGROUND

Medications with sedative or anticholinergic properties should be prescribed with caution in those with cognitive complaints. This is particularly relevant in people ageing with an intellectual disability (ID). Higher drug burden index (DBI) scores are associated with increased frailty and falls and reduced quality of life in older people and increased risk of adverse effects (daytime somnolence, constipation) in those with ID. While previous studies have shown that the ID population has higher rates of drug burden and a higher propensity to be prescribed an antipsychotic than the general population, the degree of burden has not been assessed specifically in those with ID and cognitive complaints.

METHODS

We assessed drug burden in a cohort of sequential referrals to a national memory service for people with ID. All patients were referred for assessment of cognitive complaints (self-reported or caregiver-reported problems with memory or cognition). DBI was calculated individually for each participant, and the impact of aetiology of ID, level of ID, age, psychiatric/neurological comorbidities and diagnostic outcome on DBI scores was assessed.

RESULTS

The study population was 58.6% female with a median age of 55 years and aetiology of ID was Down syndrome (DS) in 71.3%. Consensus diagnosis was Alzheimer's dementia in 40.2%, mild cognitive impairment in 29.9% and cognitively unimpaired from baseline in 25.3%. Medication use was high with 95.4% taking medications, with a median number of medications of 4 (interquartile range 4) and a rate of polypharmacy (≥5 medications) of 51.7%. Overall, 65.5% were exposed to sedative or anticholinergic medications with 39.1% exposed to a clinically significant DBI score >1. Those with psychiatric comorbidities, non-DS aetiology or epilepsy were significantly more likely to have a DBI score >1.

CONCLUSIONS

People with ID and incipient cognitive complaints have a high level of drug burden, which concerningly exceeds that of the general population.

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.

Management of patients with epilepsy and Intellectual disabilities in group homes vs. Family Homes: Insights into polypharmacy and seizure characteristics

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate the differences in ASMs prescription, seizure characteristics and predictors of polypharmacy in patients with epilepsy and Intellectual disabilities (IDs) residing in group homes versus family homes.

METHODS

This nine-year retrospective study analyzed patients with epilepsy and IDs who were admitted to the EMU, epilepsy clinics at LHSC and rehabilitation clinics for patients with IDs at Parkwood Institution. The study included individuals aged 16 years and older residing in either group homes or family homes. Data on demographics, epilepsy characteristics, and ASMs use were collected and analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences. The study utilized binary logistic regression to identify predictors of polypharmacy in patients with epilepsy and IDs.

RESULTS

The study enrolled a total of 81 patients, of which 59.3 % resided in family homes. Group home residents were significantly older (41 vs. 24.5 years; p = 0.0001) and were prescribed more ASMs (3 vs. 2; p = 0.002). Specific ASMs were more common in group homes, including valproic acid (54.5 % vs. 25.0 %), lacosamide (54.5 % vs. 22.9 %), topiramate (33.3 % vs. 14.6 %), and phenytoin (30.3 % vs. 6.2 %). Admission to the EMU was more prevalent in group homes (93.9 % vs. 52.1 %; p = 0.0001). Living in a group home increased the risk of polypharmacy (OR = 10.293, p = 0.005), as did older epilepsy onset age (OR = 1.135, p = 0.031) and generalized or focal & generalized epilepsy (OR = 7.153, p = 0.032 and OR = 10.442, p = 0.025, respectively).

SIGNIFICANCE

Our study identified notable differences in the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with epilepsy and IDs living in group homes versus family homes. Age of epilepsy onset, EMU admissions, epilepsy types, and residency setting were significant predictors of polypharmacy. These findings highlight the need for personalized care strategies and increased awareness of the potential risks associated with polypharmacy.

Antiseizure medications prescribing for behavioural and psychiatric concerns in adults with an intellectual disability living in England

Antiseizure medications (ASMs) are the second most widely prescribed psychotropic for people with intellectual disabilities in England. Multiple psychotropic prescribing is prevalent in almost half of people with intellectual disabilities on ASMs. This analysis identifies limited evidence of ASM benefit in challenging behaviour management and suggests improvements needed to inform clinical practice.

A study on prescriptions contributing to the risk of high anticholinergic burden in adults with intellectual disabilities: retrospective record linkage study

BACKGROUND

People with intellectual disabilities may face a disproportionate risk of experiencing high anticholinergic burden, and its negative sequalae, from a range of medications, and at younger ages than the general population, but there has been little previous study. Our aim was to determine the source of anticholinergic burden from prescribed medication.

METHODS

Retrospective matched observational study using record linkage. Adults with (n = 4,305), and without (n = 12,915), intellectual disabilities matched by age-, sex- and neighbourhood deprivation. The main outcome measure was the prescription of long-term (approximately 12 months use) anticholinergic medications overall (classified according to the Anticholinergic Risk Scale [ARS]), by drug class, individual drugs, and polypharmacy.

RESULTS

Adults with n = 1,654 (38.4%), and without n = 3,047 (23.6%), intellectual disabilities were prescribed medications long-term with anticholinergic effects. Of those on such drugs, adults with intellectual disabilities were most likely to be on central nervous system (62.6%), gastrointestinal (46.7%), and cardiovascular (28.4%) medications. They were prescribed more central nervous system, gynaecological/urinary tract, musculoskeletal, and respiratory medications, and less cardiovascular, infection, and endocrine medications than their matched comparators. Regardless of age, sex, or neighbourhood deprivation, adults with intellectual disabilities had greater odds of being prescribed antipsychotics (OR = 5.37 [4.40-6.57], p < 0.001), antiepileptics (OR = 2.57 [2.22-2.99], p < 0.001), and anxiolytics/hypnotics (OR = 1.28 [1.06-1.56], p = 0.012). Compared to the general population, adults with intellectual disabilities were more likely to be exposed to overall anticholinergic polypharmacy (OR = 1.48 [1.33-1.66], p < 0.001), and to psychotropic polypharmacy (OR = 2.79 [2.41-3.23], p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Adults with intellectual disabilities are exposed to a greater risk of having very high anticholinergic burden through polypharmacy from several classes of medications, which may be prescribed by several different prescribers. There is a need for evidence-based recommendations specifically about people with intellectual disabilities with multiple physical and mental ill-health conditions to optimise medication use, reduce inappropriate prescribing and adverse anticholinergic effects.

Literature Review: Evaluation of Drug Removal Techniques in Municipal and Hospital Wastewater

There are several techniques for the removal of pharmaceuticals (drugs) from wastewater; however, strengths and weaknesses have been observed in their elimination processes that limit their applicability. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the best techniques for the removal of pharmaceuticals from municipal and hospital wastewater. For this, a non-experimental, descriptive, qualitative-quantitative design was used, corresponding to a systematic review without meta-analysis. Based on established inclusion and exclusion criteria, 31 open-access articles were selected from the Scopus, ProQuest, EBSCOhost, and ScienceDirect databases. The results showed that high concentrations of analgesics such as naproxen (1.37 mg/L) and antibiotics such as norfloxacin (0.561 mg/L) are frequently found in wastewater and that techniques such as reverse osmosis, ozonation, and activated sludge have the best removal efficiency, achieving values of 99%. It was concluded that reverse osmosis is one of the most efficient techniques for eliminating ofloxacin, sulfamethoxazole, carbamazepine, and diclofenac from municipal wastewater, with removal rates ranging from 96 to 99.9%, while for hospital wastewater the activated sludge technique proved to be efficient, eliminating analgesics and antibiotics in the range of 41-99%.

Management of psychotropic medications in adults with intellectual disability: a scoping review protocol

Introduction: Psychotropic medications are commonly prescribed among adults with intellectual disability (ID), often in the absence of a psychiatric diagnosis. As such, there is great disparity between the estimated prevalence of mental illness and the rates of psychotropic medication use amongst people with ID. ‘Off-label’ use of these medications may account for much of this discrepancy, in particular their use in the management of challenging behaviour. This has come under scrutiny due to the myriad of side effects and the deficiency of high-quality data supporting their use for this indication. Understanding the causes and justifications for such disparity is essential in discerning the efficacy of current prescription practice.

Objective: To explore the existing evidence base regarding the prescription and management of psychotropic medications in adults with ID. The aim will be achieved through identifying the psychotropic medications commonly prescribed, the underlying rationale(s) for their prescription and the evidence available that demonstrates their appropriateness and effectiveness. Additionally, the paper will seek to evaluate the availability of any existing guidance that informs the management of these medications, and the evidence and outcomes of psychotropic medication dose reduction and/or cessation interventions.

Inclusion criteria: This review will consider studies that focus on the use of psychotropic medications amongst patients with ID.

Methods: Research studies (qualitative, quantitative and mixed design) and Grey Literature (English) will be included. The search will be conducted without time restrictions. Databases will include: Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, JBI Evidence Synthesis, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Databased of Systematic Reviews, PsycINFO and Scopus. A three-step search strategy will be followed, with results screened by two independent reviewers. Data will be extracted independently by two reviewers using a data extraction tool with results mapped and presented using a narrative form supported by tables and diagrams.

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.