Evaluation of persistence and healthcare utilization in patients treated with anti-seizure medications as add-on therapy: A nationwide cohort study in South Korea

Treatment compliance, treatment patterns, and healthcare utilization in epilepsy patients with first add-on antiepileptic drugs: A nationwide cohort study

Objective

This study aimed to assess the treatment compliance, patterns, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), and costs of anti-epilepsy drugs (AEDs) as the first add-on therapy in patients with epilepsy.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective population-based cohort study using Korean National Health Insurance claims data from 2016 to 2020. Patients with epilepsy who newly received AED add-on therapy were identified and followed for up to 12 months to evaluate persistence, adherence, treatment patterns, HCRU, and costs.

Results

Among 6,746 patients who initiated AED add-on therapy, 65.5% were persistent on their index AED add-on from the index date until the end of the follow-up period, and the mean persistent time on the index add-on was 307.3 ± 92.3 days. A total of 76.8% patients were adherent, with a medication possession ratio (MPR) ≥80%, and the mean MPR was 88.9 ± 25.4%. Persistence and adherence to the index AED add-on were relatively higher among patients prescribed lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, and perampanel than those prescribed carbamazepine, topiramate, or valproate. A total of 41.0% of the patients changed their index AED add-on during the follow-up period. The carbamazepine, topiramate, and valproate groups had higher rates of change than the other AED groups. HCRU and costs tended to be lower in the lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, and perampanel groups. Furthermore, perampanel showed the lowest HCRU and costs for all-cause cases as well as the lowest length of stay and outpatient visits for epilepsy-related cases.

Conclusion

In this population-based study, the use of lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, or perampanel as the first add-on therapy in patients with epilepsy contributed to better treatment compliance and lower HCRU and costs than that of carbamazepine, topiramate, or valproate.

Brain functional connectivity-based prediction of vagus nerve stimulation efficacy in pediatric pharmacoresistant epilepsy

OBJECTIVE

Although vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is a common and widely used therapy for pharmacoresistant epilepsy, the reported efficacy of VNS in pediatric patients varies, so it is unclear which children will respond to VNS therapy. This study aimed to identify functional brain network features associated with VNS action to distinguish VNS responders from nonresponders using scalp electroencephalogram (EEG) data.

METHODS

Twenty-three children were included in this study, 16 in the discovery cohort and 7 in the test cohort. Using partial correlation value as a measure of whole-brain functional connectivity, we identified the differential edges between responders and nonresponders. Results derived from this were used as input to generate a support vector machine-learning classifier to predict VNS outcomes.

RESULTS

The postcentral gyrus in the left and right parietal lobe regions was identified as the most significant differential brain region between VNS responders and nonresponders (p < 0.001). The resultant classifier demonstrated a mean AUC value of 0.88, a mean sensitivity rate of 91.4%, and a mean specificity rate of 84.3% on fivefold cross-validation in the discovery cohort. In the testing cohort, our study demonstrated an AUC value of 0.91, a sensitivity rate of 86.6%, and a specificity rate of 79.3%. Furthermore, for prediction accuracy, our model can achieve 81.4% accuracy at the epoch level and 100% accuracy at the patient level.

SIGNIFICANCE

This study provides the first treatment response prediction model for VNS using scalp EEG data with ictal recordings and offers new insights into its mechanism of action. Our results suggest that brain functional connectivity features can help predict therapeutic response to VNS therapy. With further validation, our model could facilitate the selection of targeted pediatric patients and help avoid risky and costly procedures for patients who are unlikely to benefit from VNS therapy.

Adherence to and persistence with lacosamide, perampanel, lamotrigine, and levetiracetam in adult patients with focal epilepsy in Japan: A descriptive cohort study using a claims database

Objective

We evaluated adherence to and 1-year persistence of two third-generation anti-seizure medications (ASMs), lacosamide and perampanel, in adult patients with focal epilepsy, compared with lamotrigine and levetiracetam.

Methods

A cohort study was conducted using a Japanese health insurance claims database (JMDC Inc.). We identified patients with adult-onset focal epilepsy who initiated any of the four ASMs between August 31, 2016, and October 31, 2019. Patients were further classified into ASM-naïve patients initiating any of the four ASMs as first-line treatment, and ASM-experienced patients initiating any of the four ASMs as second- or later-line treatment. Outcomes included adherence (proportion of days covered [PDC], defined as the total number of days covered by ASMs divided by the total number of days in the follow-up period) and 1-year persistence for the four ASMs.

Results

We identified 141 lacosamide, 75 perampanel, 80 lamotrigine, and 530 levetiracetam initiators. Among these, the proportion of ASM-naïve patients was highest in the levetiracetam group (60.8%), followed by the lamotrigine (25.0%), lacosamide (20.6%), and perampanel groups (1.3%). Mean PDC (standard deviation) was similar across the four groups, at 0.95 (0.08) for lacosamide, 0.93 (0.12) for perampanel, 0.92 (0.10) for lamotrigine and 0.94 (0.11) for levetiracetam. The proportion of patients persisting with treatment for 1 year was highest in the lacosamide group (73.0%), followed by the levetiracetam (58.3%), lamotrigine (57.5%), and perampanel groups (54.7%). In ASM-naïve patients, adherence and 1-year persistence were almost identical in the lacosamide, lamotrigine, and levetiracetam groups. Results for ASM-experienced patients did not significantly differ from those of all patients.

Significance

With regard to adherence and 1-year persistence, lacosamide may be equal to or better than lamotrigine and levetiracetam, especially in patients with experienced ASM, while perampanel may be comparable to lamotrigine and levetiracetam in patients with experienced ASM.

Effectiveness and safety of perampanel as adjunctive therapy among Chinese patients with focal-onset epilepsy: A real-world prospective observational study

OBJECTIVE

Perampanel (PER) has previously been shown to be effective and tolerable when used as an adjunctive therapy for patients with focal-onset seizures (FOS). This study aimed to evaluate the effect of PER as adjunctive therapy for patients with FOS in the Chinese population under real-world conditions for 1 year.

METHODS

A prospective, single-center, 1-year observational study was conducted at Huashan Hospital, enrolling both under age (≥4 years old) and adult patients with FOS. Response to PER was assessed at 3-, 6-, and 12-month checkpoints by analyzing the 50 % responder rate, the seizure-free rate, and reduction in seizure frequency.

RESULTS

One hundred and eight patients (mean age: 26.6 years, 56.5 % males) with FOS were included, with seventy-six patients finishing the 1-year follow-up (retention rate: 70.4 %, mean PER dose: 4.3 mg/day). The seizure frequency was reduced significantly at 3, 6, and 12 months relative to baseline (p < 0.001 for each seizure type). At 12 months, the responder rate was 65.8 %, and the seizure-free rate was 39.5 %. A significantly higher responder rate was found in patients with focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (p = 0.024), among which the percentage of patients with sleep-related epilepsy was significantly high (p = 0.045). Responders had a lower number of concomitant anti-seizure medications (ASMs) than the non-responders (p = 0.009). Drug-related adverse events (AEs) were reported in 37 % of patients, mostly mild or moderate, and the patients who experienced AEs had a higher daily dose of PER than those who did not (p = 0.026).

CONCLUSION

Perampanel, an add-on therapy for focal-onset seizures, was found to be effective and tolerable in Chinese patients at 12 months.

Safety evaluation of perampanel as monotherapy or first adjunctive therapy in patients with epilepsy

INTRODUCTION

There is a need for anti-seizure medications (ASMs) that are well tolerated and effective as monotherapy or first adjunctive therapy to reduce the need for adjunctive ASMs to treat newly diagnosed epilepsy, and to reduce the number of concomitant ASMs in patients with refractory epilepsy. Although the pivotal trials of perampanel evaluated its adjunctive use in patients with refractory seizures, open-label/real-world studies support its use in first/second-line settings.

AREAS COVERED

This paper reviews the pharmacology, efficacy, and safety/tolerability of perampanel, focusing on its use as monotherapy or first adjunctive therapy. The safety of perampanel in special populations and its safety/tolerability compared with that of other ASMs is also discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Perampanel is a favorable candidate for initial or first adjunctive therapy due to its favorable efficacy and safety/tolerability as monotherapy and adjunctive therapy, its long half-life and ease of use, and its limited drug-drug interactions. The proposed mitigation strategies for managing the risk of serious psychiatric adverse events are appropriate patient selection, use of low doses, and slow titration. The growing body of evidence might shift current treatment strategies towards the early use of perampanel and its use at a low dose (4 mg/day).