Refine
Document Type
- Article (29)
Has Fulltext
- yes (29)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (29)
Keywords
- Epilepsy (10)
- Seizure (5)
- epilepsy (5)
- Dravet syndrome (4)
- Prevalence (4)
- Burden of illness (3)
- Epilepsie (3)
- Healthcare costs (3)
- fenfluramine (3)
- levetiracetam (3)
Highlights
• German patients with LGS identified using most specific algorithm to date.
• Prevalence of probable LGS with epilepsy diagnosis before age 6 was 6.5 per 100,000.
• High healthcare costs of €22,787 PPY; mostly due to inpatient and home nursing care.
• Costs were greater in patients prescribed rescue medications.
• Over 10 years, LGS patients had significant mortality vs. controls (2.88 vs. 0.01%).
Abstract
Objective: This retrospective study examined patients with probable Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS) identified from German healthcare data.
Methods: This 10-year study (2007–2016) assessed healthcare insurance claims information from the Vilua Healthcare research database. A selection algorithm considering diagnoses and drug prescriptions identified patients with probable LGS. To increase the sensitivity of the identification algorithm, two populations were defined: all patients with probable LGS (broadly defined) and only those with a documented epilepsy diagnosis before 6 years of age (narrowly defined). This specific criterion was used as LGS typically has a peak seizure onset between age 3 and 5 years. Primary analyses were prevalence and demographics; secondary analyses included healthcare costs, hospitalization rate and length of stay (LOS), medication use, and mortality.
Results: In the final year of the study, 545 patients with broadly defined probable LGS (mean [range] age: 31.4 [2–89] years; male: 53%) were identified. Using the narrowly defined probable LGS definition, the number of patients was reduced to 102 (mean [range] age: 7.4 [2–14] years; male: 52%). Prevalence of broadly defined and narrowly defined probable LGS was 39.2 and 6.5 per 100,000 people. During the 10-year study, 208 patients with narrowly defined probable LGS were identified and followed up for 1379 patient-years. The mean annual cost of healthcare was €22,787 per patient-year (PPY); greatest costs were attributable to inpatient care (33%), home nursing care (13%), and medication (10%). Mean annual healthcare costs were significantly greater for those with prescribed rescue medication (45% of patient-years) versus those without (€33,872 vs. €13,785 PPY, p < 0.001). Mean (standard deviation [SD]) annual hospitalization rate was 1.6 (2.0) PPY with mean (SD) annual LOS of 22.7 (46.0) days. Annual hospitalization rate was significantly greater in those who were prescribed rescue medication versus those who were not (2.2 [2.3] vs. 1.1 [1.6] PPY, p < 0.001). The mean (SD) number of different medications prescribed was 11.3 (7.3) PPY and 33.8 (17.0) over the entire observable time per patient (OET); antiepileptic drugs only accounted for 2.1 (1.1) of the medications prescribed PPY and 3.8 (2.0) OET. Over the 10-year study period, mortality in patients with narrowly defined probable LGS was significantly higher than the matched control population (six events [2.88%] vs. one event [0.01%], p < 0.001).
Conclusion: Annual healthcare costs incurred by patients with probable LGS in Germany were substantial, and mostly attributable to inpatient care, home nursing care, and medication. Patients prescribed with rescue medication incurred significantly greater costs than those who were not. Patients with narrowly defined probable LGS had a higher mortality rate versus control populations.
Highlights
• Prevalence of probable DS identified from German healthcare data: 4.7 per 100,000.
• Healthcare costs: €11,048 per patient-year, mostly inpatient care 47%, medication 26%.
• Costs and hospitalizations greater in patients with rescue medication than without.
• Mean (SD) of 5.0 (2.5) different ASMs prescribed per patient over study period.
• Patients with probable DS had significantly higher mortality risk vs. controls (11.88% vs. 1.19%).
Abstract
Objective: Ten-year retrospective study to assess burden of illness in patients with probable Dravet syndrome (DS) identified from German healthcare data.
Methods: In the absence of an International Classification of Diseases code, patients with probable DS were identified using a selection algorithm considering diagnoses and drug prescriptions. Primary analyses were prevalence and demographics; secondary analyses included healthcare costs, annual hospitalization rate (AHR) and length of stay (LOS), medication use, and mortality.
Results: In the final study year, 64 patients with probable DS (mean [range] age: 33.2 [3–82] years; male: 48%) were identified. Prevalence: 4.7 per 100,000 people. During the study, 160 patients with probable DS were identified and followed up for 1,261 patient-years. Mean cost of healthcare was €11,048 per patient-year (PPY), mostly attributable to inpatient care (47%), medication (26%), and services and devices (19%). Annual healthcare costs were significantly greater for those with prescribed rescue medication (15% of patient-years) vs. without (€16,123 vs. €10,125 PPY, p < 0.001). Mean (standard deviation [SD]) AHR and LOS were 1.1 (1.7) and 17.5 (33.5) days PPY. AHR was significantly greater in patients with prescribed rescue medication vs. without (1.6 [2.0] vs. 1.0 [1.6] PPY, p < 0.001). Mean (SD) number of antiseizure medications prescribed was 2.6 (1.2) PPY and 5.0 (2.5) over the entire observable time for each patient. Mortality rate was significantly higher for probable DS vs. matched controls (11.88% [19 events] vs. 1.19% [172 events], p < 0.001).
Conclusion: Probable DS is associated with substantial healthcare costs in Germany.
Hintergrund: Das Dravet-Syndrom (DS) ist ein seltenes, in der frühen Kindheit beginnendes, therapierefraktäres Epilepsiesyndrom, das mit einer hohen Morbidität und Mortalität verbunden ist.
Fragestellung: Ziele der Querschnittsstudie „Dravet syndrome caregiver survey“ (DISCUSS) sind die Identifizierung und Beschreibung der Faktoren, die einen Einfluss auf die Krankheitslast von Patienten mit DS und ihre Betreuer haben können. Die Ergebnisse der deutschen Kohorte werden vorgestellt.
Material und Methoden: Die Datenerhebung erfolgte durch eine anonyme Befragung von Eltern. Die Ergebnisse wurden für die verschiedenen Altersgruppen statistisch ausgewertet.
Ergebnisse: Der Fragebogen wurde von 68 Eltern der DS-Patienten mit einem durchschnittlichen Alter von 10 Jahren (Median: 9, Spanne: 1–26) ausgefüllt. Nur 3 Patienten (4,4 %) waren in den letzten 3 Monaten anfallsfrei. Insgesamt hatten 97 % der Patienten, die älter als 5 Jahre waren (n = 45), mindestens eine Komorbidität. Die zum Befragungszeitpunkt am häufigsten eingenommenen Antiepileptika waren Valproat, Kaliumbromid, Stiripentol, Clobazam und Topiramat. In der Vergangenheit wurden Natriumkanalblocker, Phenobarbital und Levetiracetam eingesetzt, aktuell fanden diese Antiepileptika nur selten Verwendung. Die Lebensqualität der Patienten war niedriger als die der Allgemeinbevölkerung. Die Erkrankung eines Familienmitglieds mit DS beeinflusst Eltern und Geschwister in hohem Maße.
Diskussion: Trotz individueller Kombinationstherapien sind die meisten Patienten mit DS nicht anfallsfrei. Insgesamt hat sich der Einsatz von beim DS wenig wirksamer Medikamente und der kontraindizierten Natriumkanalblocker zugunsten von wirksameren Medikamenten verschoben. Neue Therapie- und Versorgungskonzepte sind notwendig, um die Versorgung der Patienten mit DS zu verbessern und Eltern und Geschwister zu entlasten.
Objective: The term ‘precision medicine’ describes a rational treatment strategy tailored to one person that reverses or modifies the disease pathophysiology. In epilepsy, single case and small cohort reports document nascent precision medicine strategies in specific genetic epilepsies. The aim of this multicentre observational study was to investigate the deeper complexity of precision medicine in epilepsy. Methods: A systematic survey of patients with epilepsy with a molecular genetic diagnosis was conducted in six tertiary epilepsy centres including children and adults. A standardised questionnaire was used for data collection, including genetic findings and impact on clinical and therapeutic management. Results: We included 293 patients with genetic epilepsies, 137 children and 156 adults, 162 females and 131 males. Treatment changes were undertaken because of the genetic findings in 94 patients (32%), including rational precision medicine treatment and/or a treatment change prompted by the genetic diagnosis, but not directly related to known pathophysiological mechanisms. There was a rational precision medicine treatment for 56 patients (19%), and this was tried in 33/56 (59%) and was successful (ie, >50% seizure reduction) in 10/33 (30%) patients. In 73/293 (25%) patients there was a treatment change prompted by the genetic diagnosis, but not directly related to known pathophysiological mechanisms, and this was successful in 24/73 (33%). Significance: Our survey of clinical practice in specialised epilepsy centres shows high variability of clinical outcomes following the identification of a genetic cause for an epilepsy. Meaningful change in the treatment paradigm after genetic testing is not yet possible for many people with epilepsy. This systematic survey provides an overview of the current application of precision medicine in the epilepsies, and suggests the adoption of a more considered approach.
The present study aims to report the currently available epidemiology of focal onset seizures in children aged >1 month to 4 years with the help of a literature review. The terms ‘seizure*’ OR ‘epilepsy’ combined with pediatric and epidemiology terms were used to search Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science up to November 16, 2021. Due to the scarcity of epidemiology data on focal onset seizures, the incidence and prevalence were estimated using the proportion of focal onset seizures in epilepsy patients from the most recently published articles. The estimated annual incidence per 100,000 children of focal onset seizures in children of 0–4 years of age ranged from 25.1 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 18.9–32.7) in the United Kingdom to 111.8 in the United States. The estimated period prevalence of focal onset seizures in children 0–4 years of age ranged from 0.15 % (99 % CI 0.13–0.18) in Canada to 0.61 % in the United States. Neurodevelopmental outcomes and psychiatric disorders were the most commonly reported comorbidities in children with epilepsy of age 0–4 years. Presence of focal onset seizures in children with different epilepsy syndromes needs to be thoroughly considered in the treatment planning of this population of interest.
Introduction: Dravet syndrome (DS) is a rare developmental and epileptic encephalopathy. This study estimated cost, cost-driving factors and quality of life (QoL) in patients with Dravet syndrome and their caregivers in a prospective, multicenter study in Germany.
Methods: A validated 3–12-month retrospective questionnaire and a prospective 3-month diary assessing clinical characteristics, QoL, and direct, indirect and out-of-pocket (OOP) costs were administered to caregivers of patients with DS throughout Germany.
Results: Caregivers of 93 patients (mean age 10.1 years, ±7.1, range 15 months–33.7 years) submitted questionnaires and 77 prospective diaries. The majority of patients (95%) experienced at least one seizure during the previous 12 months and 77% a status epilepticus (SE) at least once in their lives. Over 70% of patients had behavioural problems and delayed speech development and over 80% attention deficit symptoms and disturbance of motor skills and movement coordination. Patient QoL was lower than in the general population and 45% of caregivers had some form of depressive symptoms. Direct health care costs per three months were a mean of €6,043 ± €5,825 (median €4054, CI €4935-€7350) per patient. Inpatient costs formed the single most important cost category (28%, €1,702 ± €4,315), followed by care grade benefits (19%, €1,130 ± €805), anti-epileptic drug (AED) costs (15%, €892 ± €1,017) and ancillary treatments (9%, €559 ± €503). Total indirect costs were €4,399 ±€ 4,989 (median €0, CI €3466-€5551) in mothers and €391 ± €1,352 (median €0, CI €195-€841) in fathers. In univariate analysis seizure frequency, experience of SE, nursing care level and severe additional symptoms were found to be associated with total direct healthcare costs. Severe additional symptoms was the single independently significant explanatory factor in a multivariate analysis.
Conclusions: This study over a period up to 15 months revealed substantial direct and indirect healthcare costs of DS in Germany and highlights the relatively low patient and caregiver QoL compared with the general population.
Eine barrierefreie Teilnahme am alltäglichen Leben stellt für Menschen mit aktiver Epilepsie häufig eine Herausforderung dar. Epileptische Anfälle können in Kindergarten, Schule und am Arbeitsplatz sowie im häuslichen Umfeld Unsicherheit und Überforderung hervorrufen. Individuell erstellte Pläne für Betreuende, Angehörige, Aufsichtspersonen und den Rettungsdienst sollen im Falle eines akuten Anfalls geeignete Handlungsanweisungen geben. Bisher gibt es hierfür im deutschsprachigen Raum keine standardisierten Vorlagen. Mit den Handlungsplänen bei epileptischen Anfällen für Laien (HEAL) bzw. Therapeuten (HEAT) werden hier 2 Formulare vorgestellt, die zum einen eine standardisierte Grundlage bieten und andererseits leicht auf den individuellen Bedarf angepasst werden können.
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.
Eine barrierefreie Teilnahme am alltäglichen Leben stellt für Menschen mit aktiver Epilepsie häufig eine Herausforderung dar. Epileptische Anfälle können in Kindergarten, Schule und am Arbeitsplatz sowie im häuslichen Umfeld Unsicherheit und Überforderung hervorrufen. Individuell erstellte Pläne für Betreuende, Angehörige, Aufsichtspersonen und den Rettungsdienst sollen im Falle eines akuten Anfalls geeignete Handlungsanweisungen geben. Bisher gibt es hierfür im deutschsprachigen Raum keine standardisierten Vorlagen. Mit den Handlungsplänen bei epileptischen Anfällen für Laien (HEAL) bzw. Therapeuten (HEAT) werden hier 2 Formulare vorgestellt, die zum einen eine standardisierte Grundlage bieten und andererseits leicht auf den individuellen Bedarf angepasst werden können.