Refine
Document Type
- Article (29)
Has Fulltext
- yes (29) (remove)
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)
Dravet syndrome is a severe developmental and epileptic encephalopathy characterised by refractory seizures and cognitive dysfunction. The treatment is challenging, not least because the seizures are highly drug resistant, requiring multiple anti-seizure medications (ASMs), while some ASMs can exacerbate seizures. Initial treatments include the broad-spectrum ASMs valproate (VPA), and clobazam (CLB) in some regions; however, they are generally insufficient to control seizures. With this in mind, three adjunct ASMs have been approved specifically for the treatment of seizures in patients with Dravet syndrome: stiripentol (STP) in 2007 in the European Union and 2018 in the USA, cannabidiol (CBD) in 2018/2019 (in combination with CLB in the European Union) and fenfluramine (FFA) in 2020. These “add-on” therapies (mostly to VPA/CLB) are used as escalation therapies, with the choice dependent on availability in different countries, patient characteristics and caregiver preferences. Topiramate is also frequently used, with evidence of efficacy in Dravet syndrome, and there is anecdotal evidence of efficacy with bromide, which is frequently used in Germany and Japan. With a growing treatment landscape for Dravet syndrome, there can be practical challenges for clinicians, particularly with issues associated with polypharmacy. This practical guide provides an overview of these main ASMs including their indications/contraindications, mechanism of action, efficacy, safety and tolerability profile, dosage requirements, and laboratory and clinical parameters to be evaluated. Standard laboratory and clinical parameters include blood counts, liver function tests, serum concentrations of ASMs, monitoring the growth of children, as well as weight loss and acceleration of behavioural problems. Regular cardiac monitoring is also important with FFA as it has previously been associated with cases of cardiac valve disease when used in adults at high doses (up to 120 mg/day) in combination with phentermine as a therapy for obesity. Importantly, no signs of heart valve disease have been documented to date at the low doses used in patients with developmental and epileptic encephalopathies. In addition, potential drug–drug interactions and their consequences are a key consideration in everyday practice. Interactions that potentially require dosage adjustments to alleviate adverse events include the following: STP + CLB resulting in increased plasma concentrations of CLB and its active metabolite norclobazam may increase somnolence, and an interaction with STP and VPA may increase gastrointestinal adverse events. Cannabidiol has a bi-directional interaction with CLB producing an increase in plasma concentrations of 7-OH-CBD and norclobazam resulting in the potential for increased somnolence and sedation. In addition, CBD is associated with elevations of liver transaminases particularly in patients taking concomitant VPA. The interaction between FFA and STP requires a dose reduction of FFA. Furthermore, concomitant administration of VPA with topiramate has been associated with encephalopathy and/or hyperammonaemia. Finally, we briefly describe other ASMs used in Dravet syndrome, and current key clinical trials.
Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS), a childhood-onset severe developmental and epileptic encephalopathy (DEE), is an entity that encompasses a heterogenous group of aetiologies, with no single genetic cause. It is characterised by multiple seizure types, an abnormal EEG with generalised slow spike and wave discharges and cognitive impairment, associated with high morbidity and profound effects on the quality of life of patients and their families. Drug-refractory seizures are a hallmark and treatment is further complicated by its multiple morbidities, which evolve over the patient’s lifetime. This review provides a comprehensive overview of the current and future options for the treatment of seizures associated with LGS. Six treatments are specifically indicated as adjunct therapies for the treatment of seizures associated with LGS in the US: lamotrigine, clobazam, rufinamide, topiramate, felbamate and most recently cannabidiol. These therapies have demonstrated reductions in drop seizures in 15%–68% of patients across trials, with responder rates (≥ 50% reduction in drop seizures) of 37%–78%. Valproate is still the preferred first-line treatment, generally in combination with lamotrigine or clobazam. Other treatments frequently used off-label include the broad spectrum anti-epileptic drugs (AED) levetiracetam, zonisamide and perampanel, while recent evidence from observational studies has indicated that a newer AED, the levetiracetam analogue brivaracetam, may be effective and well tolerated in LGS patients. Other treatments in clinical development include fenfluramine in late phase III, perampanel, soticlestat–OV953/TAK-953, carisbamate and ganaxolone. Non-pharmacologic interventions include the ketogenic diet, vagus nerve stimulation and surgical interventions; these are also expanding, with the potential for less invasive techniques for corpus callosotomy that have promise for reducing complications. However, despite these advancements, patients continue to experience a significant burden. Because LGS is not a single entity, tailoring of treatment is needed as opposed to a ‘one size fits all’ approach. Further research is needed into the underlying aetiologies and pathophysiology of LGS, together with advancements in treatments that encompass the spectrum of seizures associated with this complex syndrome.
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.
Purpose: 10-year retrospective study to assess burden of illness in individuals with tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) identified from German healthcare data. Methods: Patients with TSC were identified by International Classification of Diseases code Q85.1. Patients with epilepsy were identified by epilepsy diagnosis or antiseizure medication (ASM) prescription after TSC diagnosis. Results: Using data from 2016 (final study year), 100 patients with TSC were identified (mean [range] age: 38 [1–86] years; male: 40%); prevalence: 7.9 per 100,000 (TSC), 2.2 per 100,000 (TSC with epilepsy). During the 10-year study period (2007–2016), 256 patients with TSC were identified and followed up for 1,784 patient- years (epilepsy: 36%, 616 patient-years). TSC manifestations/comorbidities (apart from epilepsy) were identi- fied more frequently in patients with epilepsy than without. Mean annual healthcare costs for patients with TSC were €6,139 per patient-year (PPY), mostly attributable to medication (35%) and inpatient care (29%). Patients with epilepsy incurred costs more than double those without. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) annual hospi- talisation rate (AHR) and length of stay (LOS) PPY: 0.5 (1.0) and 5.9 (18.6) days for TSC. AHR and LOS were greater in patients with epilepsy than without. Mean (SD) number of ASMs prescribed (TSC with epilepsy): 3.0 (2.3) over the entire observable time per patient. Mortality rates (vs. control): 5.08% (vs. 1.69%, p<0.001) for TSC, 7.53% (vs. 0.98%, p<0.001) for TSC with epilepsy, 3.68% (vs. 2.03%, p = 0.003) for TSC without epilepsy. Conclusion: Healthcare costs, resource utilisation, and mortality were greater in patients with TSC and epilepsy than those without epilepsy.
Objective: Dravet syndrome (DS) is a rare but severe drug-resistant epilepsy. Before the approval of fenfluramine (FFA) for the treatment of seizures in DS, patients in Germany could receive treatment under a compassionate use program (CUP). Methods: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective, observational study to describe the efficacy, tolerability, and retention of FFA within the CUP. Patients received add-on therapy with oral FFA gradually titrated to a target dose between .13 and .7 mg/kg/day. Results: Overall, 78 patients with DS (median age = 8.0 years, range = 2.1–46.0; 53% female, median concomitant antiseizure medications [ASMs] = 3) were treated with FFA for a median duration of 255.5 days (range = 31–572). Responder rates (a ≥50% reduction; n = 78) and seizure-freedom rates at 3 months were 68% and 14% for total seizures, respectively, and 67% and 23% for generalized tonic–clonic seizures. Responder rates were consistent at 6 and 12 months (n = 66 and n = 43, respectively). Median seizure days per month significantly decreased from 10.0 (range = .5–30) to 3.0 (range = 0–30) in the 3-month period before and after FFA treatment (p < .001). Significantly fewer patients reported at least one episode of status epilepticus (28% vs. 14% patients before and after FFA initiation, p = .005). During FFA treatment, 35 (45%) patients were able to discontinue a concomitant ASM. At the last follow-up date, 66 (85%) patients remained on treatment with FFA. The most common adverse events were somnolence (36%), decreased appetite (22%), and ataxia (8%). Forty-eight (62%) patients were reported as having a meaningful global clinical improvement. Significance: In a large cohort of patients, FFA demonstrated efficacy across a range of outcomes including clinically significant reductions in convulsive seizures, and was well tolerated, providing valuable information for real-world practice.
Key Points: Seventy-eight patients with Dravet syndrome were treated with FFA at multiple centers within the CUP in Germany; FFA had a good retention rate over a sustained period; 85% of patients remained on treatment with FFA for a median duration of 255.5 days; FFA was associated with clinically meaningful reductions in total and convulsive seizures, seizure days per month, and episodes of status epilepticus; FFA was associated with reductions in the number or dose of concomitant antiseizure medications in 68% of patients; FFA was well tolerated, with the main adverse events being somnolence (36%), decreased appetite (22%), and ataxia (8%).
Objective: Dravet syndrome (DS) is a rare but severe drug-resistant epilepsy. Before the approval of fenfluramine (FFA) for the treatment of seizures in DS, patients in Germany could receive treatment under a compassionate use program (CUP). Methods: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective, observational study to describe the efficacy, tolerability, and retention of FFA within the CUP. Patients received add-on therapy with oral FFA gradually titrated to a target dose between .13 and .7 mg/kg/day Results: Overall, 78 patients with DS (median age = 8.0 years, range = 2.1–46.0; 53% female, median concomitant antiseizure medications [ASMs] = 3) were treated with FFA for a median duration of 255.5 days (range = 31–572). Responder rates (a ≥50% reduction; n = 78) and seizure-freedom rates at 3 months were 68% and 14% for total seizures, respectively, and 67% and 23% for generalized tonic–clonic seizures. Responder rates were consistent at 6 and 12 months (n = 66 and n = 43, respectively). Median seizure days per month significantly decreased from 10.0 (range = .5–30) to 3.0 (range = 0–30) in the 3-month period before and after FFA treatment (p < .001). Significantly fewer patients reported at least one episode of status epilepticus (28% vs. 14% patients before and after FFA initiation, p = .005). During FFA treatment, 35 (45%) patients were able to discontinue a concomitant ASM. At the last follow-up date, 66 (85%) patients remained on treatment with FFA. The most common adverse events were somnolence (36%), decreased appetite (22%), and ataxia (8%). Forty-eight (62%) patients were reported as having a meaningful global clinical improvement. Significance: In a large cohort of patients, FFA demonstrated efficacy across a range of outcomes including clinically significant reductions in convulsive seizures, and was well tolerated, providing valuable information for real-world practice.
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.
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.
Tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) is a rare genetic disorder caused by mutations in the TSC1 or TSC2 genes, which encode proteins that antagonise the mammalian isoform of the target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) – a key mediator of cell growth and metabolism. TSC is characterised by the development of benign tumours in multiple organs, together with neurological manifestations including epilepsy and TSC-associated neuropsychiatric disorders (TAND). Epilepsy occurs frequently and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality; however, the management is challenging due to the intractable nature of the seizures. Preventative epilepsy treatment is a key aim, especially as patients with epilepsy may be at a higher risk of developing severe cognitive and behavioural impairment. Vigabatrin given preventatively reduces the risk and severity of epilepsy although the benefits for TAND are inconclusive. These promising results could pave the way for evaluating other treatments in a preventative capacity, especially those that may address the underlying pathophysiology of TSC, including everolimus, cannabidiol and the ketogenic diet (KD). Everolimus is an mTOR inhibitor approved for the adjunctive treatment of refractory TSC-associated seizures that has demonstrated significant reductions in seizure frequency compared with placebo, improvements that were sustained after 2 years of treatment. Highly purified cannabidiol, recently approved in the US as Epidiolex® for TSC-associated seizures in patients ⩾1 years of age, and the KD, may also participate in the regulation of the mTOR pathway. This review focusses on the pivotal clinical evidence surrounding these potential targeted therapies that may form the foundation of precision medicine for TSC-associated epilepsy, as well as other current treatments including anti-seizure drugs, vagus nerve stimulation and surgery. New future therapies are also discussed, together with the potential for preventative treatment with targeted therapies. Due to advances in understanding the molecular genetics and pathophysiology, TSC represents a prototypic clinical syndrome for studying epileptogenesis and the impact of precision medicine.
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.