Starting a new anti-seizure medication in drug-resistant epilepsy: Add-on or substitute?

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.

Patterns of antiseizure medication utilization in the Human Epilepsy Project

OBJECTIVE

This study was undertaken to ascertain the natural history and patterns of antiseizure medication (ASM) use in newly diagnosed focal epilepsy patients who were initially started on monotherapy.

METHODS

The data were derived from the Human Epilepsy Project. Differences between the durations of the most commonly first prescribed ASM monotherapies were assessed using a Cox proportional hazards model. Subjects were classified into three groups: monotherapy, sequential monotherapy, and polytherapy.

RESULTS

A total of 443 patients were included in the analysis, with a median age of 32 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 20-44) and median follow-up time of 3.2 years (IQR = 2.4-4.2); 161 (36.3%) patients remained on monotherapy with their initially prescribed ASM at the time of their last follow-up. The mean (SEM) and median (IQR) duration that patients stayed on monotherapy with their initial ASM was 2.1 (2.0-2.2) and 1.9 (.3-3.5) years, respectively. The most commonly prescribed initial ASM was levetiracetam (254, 57.3%), followed by lamotrigine (77, 17.4%), oxcarbazepine (38, 8.6%), and carbamazepine (24, 5.4%). Among those who did not remain on the initial monotherapy, 167 (59.2%) transitioned to another ASM as monotherapy (sequential monotherapy) and 115 (40.8%) ended up on polytherapy. Patients remained significantly longer on lamotrigine (mean = 2.8 years, median = 3.1 years) compared to levetiracetam (mean = 2.0 years, median = 1.5 years) as a first prescribed medication (hazard ratio = 1.5, 95% confidence interval = 1.0-2.2). As the study progressed, the proportion of patients on lamotrigine, carbamazepine, and oxcarbazepine as well as other sodium channel agents increased from a little more than one third (154, 34.8%) of patients to more than two thirds (303, 68.4%) of patients.

SIGNIFICANCE

Slightly more than one third of focal epilepsy patients remain on monotherapy with their first prescribed ASM. Approximately three in five patients transition to monotherapy with another ASM, whereas approximately two in five end up on polytherapy. Patients remain on lamotrigine for a longer duration compared to levetiracetam when it is prescribed as the initial monotherapy.

The efficacy and safety of first-line anti-seizure medications as substitution therapy for children with drug-resistant epilepsy: a randomized controlled trial protocol

Although many anti-seizure medications (ASMs) are available, treatment failure, known as drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE), still occurs in around 30% of children with epilepsy. Second-line ASMs are usually used as substitution therapy in DRE to control seizures, although international consensus is not available yet. Previous studies focus on comparing the ASMs, whether as add-on or substitution therapy, mainly conducted in newly diagnosed epilepsy. However, the study that investigated first-line ASMs as substitution therapy compared to second-line ones, particularly among DRE children, is still lacking. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) enrolling 102 participants, aged 1-18, at three referral hospitals in Indonesia will be conducted, dividing them into intervention and control groups. The intervention group will be treated with first-line ASMs as the substitution therapy, while the other in the control group will get second-line ASMs. The primary outcome measure is the proportion difference of responders between groups who get first-line and second-line ASMs in 14 weeks of intervention. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT05697614.

Should substitution monotherapy or combination therapy be used after failure of the first antiseizure medication? Observations from a 30-year cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To assess the temporal trends in the use of second antiseizure (ASM) regimens and compare the efficacy of substitution monotherapy and combination therapy after failure of initial monotherapy in people with epilepsy.

METHODS

This was a longitudinal observational cohort study conducted at the Epilepsy Unit of the Western Infirmary in Glasgow, Scotland. We included patients who were newly treated for epilepsy with ASMs between July 1982, and October 2012. All patients were followed up for a minimum of 2 years. Seizure freedom was defined as no seizure for at least 1 year on unchanged medication at the last follow up.

RESULTS

During the study period, 498 patients were treated with a second ASM regimen after failure of the initial ASM monotherapy, of whom 346 (69%) were prescribed combination therapy and 152 (31%) were given substitution monotherapy. The proportion of patients receiving second regimen as combination therapy increased during the study period from 46% in first epoch (1985-1994) to 78% in the last (2005-2015) (RR = 1.66, 95% CI: 1.17-2.36, corrected-p = .010). Overall, 21% (104/498) of the patients achieved seizure freedom on the second ASM regimen, which was less than half of the seizure-free rate on the initial ASM monotherapy (45%, p < .001). Patients who received substitution monotherapy had similar seizure-free rate compared with those who received combination therapy (RR = 1.17, 95% CI: 0.81-1.69, p = .41). Individual ASMs used, either alone or in combination, had similar efficacy. However, the subgroup analysis was limited by small sample sizes.

SIGNIFICANCE

The choice of second regimen used based on clinical judgment was not associated with treatment outcome in patients whose initial monotherapy failed due to poor seizure control. Alternative approaches such as machine learning should be explored to aid individualized selection of the second ASM regimen.

The Prevention and Reversal of a Phenytoin-Resistant Model by N-acetylcysteine Therapy Involves the Nrf2/P-Glycoprotein Pathway at the Blood-Brain Barrier

The transporter hypothesis is one of the most popular hypotheses of drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE). P-glycoprotein (P-gp), a channel protein at the blood-brain barrier (BBB), plays an important role in the transport of some anti-seizure drugs from brain tissue into vessels, which reduces drug concentrations and diminishes the effects of drug treatment. We performed this study to test whether P-gp is overexpressed in DRE and identify ways to prevent and reverse DRE. In this study, we established a phenytoin (PHT)-resistant mouse model and revealed that P-gp was overexpressed at the BBB in PHT-resistant mice. The P-gp inhibitor nimodipine decreased the resistance of phenytoin. Antioxidative preventive treatment with N-acetylcysteine (NAC) prevented the mice from entering a PHT-resistant state, and NAC therapy tended to reverse PHT resistance into sensitivity. We were also able to induce PHT resistance by activating the Nrf2/P-gp pathway, which indicates that oxidative stress plays an important role in drug resistance. Taken together, these findings suggest that antioxidative therapy may be a promising strategy for overcoming DRE.

Patient characteristics and antiseizure medication pathways in newly diagnosed epilepsy: Feasibility and pilot results using the common data model in a single-center electronic medical record database

INTRODUCTION

Efforts to characterize variability in epilepsy treatment pathways are limited by the large number of possible antiseizure medication (ASM) regimens and sequences, heterogeneity of patients, and challenges of measuring confounding variables and outcomes across institutions. The Observational Health Data Science and Informatics (OHDSI) collaborative is an international data network representing over 1 billion patient records using common data standards. However, few studies have applied OHDSI's Common Data Model (CDM) to the population with epilepsy and none have validated relevant concepts. The goals of this study were to demonstrate the feasibility of characterizing adult patients with epilepsy and ASM treatment pathways using the CDM in an electronic health record (EHR)-derived database.

METHODS

We validated a phenotype algorithm for epilepsy in adults using the CDM in an EHR-derived database (2001-2020) against source records and a prospectively maintained database of patients with confirmed epilepsy. We obtained the frequency of all antecedent conditions and procedures for patients meeting the epilepsy phenotype criteria and characterized ASM exposure sequences over time and by age and sex.

RESULTS

The phenotype algorithm identified epilepsy with 73.0-85.0% positive predictive value and 86.3% sensitivity. Many patients had neurologic conditions and diagnoses antecedent to meeting epilepsy criteria. Levetiracetam incrementally replaced phenytoin as the most common first-line agent, but significant heterogeneity remained, particularly in second-line and subsequent agents. Drug sequences included up to 8 unique ingredients and a total of 1,235 unique pathways were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the availability of additional ASMs in the last 2 decades and accumulated guidelines and evidence, ASM use varies significantly in practice, particularly for second-line and subsequent agents. Multi-center OHDSI studies have the potential to better characterize the full extent of variability and support observational comparative effectiveness research, but additional work is needed to validate covariates and outcomes.

G-alpha interacting protein interacting protein, C terminus 1 regulates epileptogenesis by increasing the expression of metabotropic glutamate receptor 7

Aims

It has been reported that the G‐alpha interacting protein (GAIP) interacting protein, C terminus 1 (GIPC1/GIPC) engages in vesicular trafficking, receptor transport and expression, and endocytosis. However, its role in epilepsy is unclear. Therefore, in this study, we aimed to explore the role of GIPC1 in epilepsy and its possible underlying mechanism.

Methods

The expression patterns of GIPC1 in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) and in mice with kainic acid (KA)‐induced epilepsy were detected. Behavioral video monitoring and hippocampal local field potential (LFP) recordings were carried out to determine the role of GIPC1 in epileptogenesis after overexpression of GIPC1. Coimmunoprecipitation (Co‐IP) assay and high‐resolution immunofluorescence staining were conducted to investigate the relationship between GIPC1 and metabotropic glutamate receptor 7 (mGluR7). In addition, the expression of mGluR7 after overexpression of GIPC1 was measured, and behavioral video monitoring and LFP recordings after antagonism of mGluR7 were performed to explore the possible mechanism mediated by GIPC1.

Results

GIPC1 was downregulated in the brain tissues of patients with TLE and mice with KA‐induced epilepsy. After overexpression of GIPC1, prolonged latency period, decreased epileptic seizures and reduced seizure severity in behavioral analyses, and fewer and shorter abnormal brain discharges in LFP recordings of KA‐induced epileptic mice were observed. The result of the Co‐IP assay showed the interaction between GIPC1 and mGluR7, and the high‐resolution immunofluorescence staining also showed the colocalization of these two proteins. Additionally, along with GIPC1 overexpression, the total and cell membrane expression levels of mGluR7 were also increased. And after antagonism of mGluR7, increased epileptic seizures and aggravated seizure severity in behavioral analyses and more and longer abnormal brain discharges in LFP recordings were observed.

Conclusion

GIPC1 regulates epileptogenesis by interacting with mGluR7 and increasing its expression.

Efficacy and tolerability of adjuvant perampanel: an Australian multicenter real-world observational study in refractory focal and generalized epilepsy syndromes

PURPOSE

To explore the efficacy and tolerability of adjuvant perampanel (PER) and their associated risk factors in late add-on drug-resistant epilepsy.

METHOD

Retrospective multicenter 'real-world' observational study. Consecutively identified patients commenced on PER, with mixed epilepsy syndromes, from nine Australian epilepsy centers. Primary efficacy endpoints were at least 50% reduction in seizure frequency (responders), seizure freedom, and retention at 6 and 12 months, following a 3-month titration period. Tolerability endpoints were cessation of PER for any reason, cessation of PER due to treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE), or cessation due to inefficacy. Outcomes were assessed for a-priori risk factors associated with efficacy and tolerability.

RESULTS

Three-hundred and eighty seven adults were identified and followed up for a median of 12.1 months (IQR 7.0-25.2). Focal epilepsy accounted for 79.6% (FE), idiopathic generalized epilepsy (IGE), 10.3% and developmental epileptic encephalopathy (DEE) 10.1%, of the cohort. All patients had drug-resistant epilepsy, 71.6% had never experienced six months of seizure freedom, and the mean number of antiepileptic medications (AEDs) prior to starting PER was six. At 12 months, with missing cases classified as treatment failure, retention was 40.0%, responder 21.7%, and seizure freedom 9.0%, whereas, using last outcome carried forward (LOCF), responder and seizure freedom rates were 41.3% and 14.7%, respectively. Older age of epilepsy onset was associated with a marginal increase in the likelihood of seizure freedom at 12-month maintenance (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.02, 1.06). Male sex (adjusted OR [aOR] 2.06 95% CI 1.33, 3.19), lower number of prior AEDs (aOR 0.84, 95% CI 0.74, 0.96) and no previous seizure-free period of at least 6-month duration (aOR 2.04 95% CI 1.21, 3.47) were associated with retention. Perampanel combined with a GABA receptor AED was associated with a lower responder rate at 12 months but reduced cessation of PER. The most common TEAEs were neuropsychiatric (18.86%), followed by dizziness (13.70%), and sleepiness (5.68%).

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant PER treatment, even in late-add on drug-resistant epilepsy is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for drug-resistant epilepsy.