Medizin
Filtern
Dokumenttyp
Sprache
- Englisch (7)
Volltext vorhanden
- ja (7)
Gehört zur Bibliographie
- nein (7)
Schlagworte
- epilepsy (3)
- levetiracetam (2)
- pharmacoresistance (2)
- Costs (1)
- Depression (1)
- Epilepsy (1)
- GWAS (1)
- Lafora disease (1)
- Quality of life (1)
- Seizure (1)
Prescribing practice of pregabalin/gabapentin in pain therapy : an evaluation of German claim data
(2019)
Objectives: To analyse the prevalence and incidence of pregabalin and gabapentin (P/G) prescriptions, typical therapeutic uses of P/G with special attention to pain-related diagnoses and discontinuation rates.
Design: Secondary data analysis.
Setting: Primary and secondary care in Germany.
Participants: Four million patients in the years 2009–2015 (anonymous health insurance data).
Intervention: None.
Primary and secondary outcome measures: P/G prescribing rates, P/G prescribing rates associated with pain therapy, analysis of pain-related diagnoses leading to new P/G prescriptions and the discontinuation rate of P/G.
Results: In 2015, 1.6% of insured persons received P/G prescriptions. Among the patients with pain first treated with P/G, as few as 25.7% were diagnosed with a typical neuropathic pain disorder. The remaining 74.3% had either not received a diagnosis of neuropathic pain or showed a neuropathic component that was pathophysiologically conceivable but did not support the prescription of P/G. High discontinuation rates were observed (85%). Among the patients who had discontinued the drug, 61.1% did not receive follow-up prescriptions within 2 years.
Conclusion: The results show that P/G is widely prescribed in cases of chronic pain irrespective of neuropathic pain diagnoses. The high discontinuation rate indicates a lack of therapeutic benefits and/or the occurrence of adverse effects.
Aim: Pharmacoresistance is a major burden in epilepsy treatment. We aimed to identify genetic biomarkers in response to specific antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in genetic generalized epilepsies (GGE). Materials & methods: We conducted a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of 3.3 million autosomal SNPs in 893 European subjects with GGE – responsive or nonresponsive to lamotrigine, levetiracetam and valproic acid. Results: Our GWAS of AED response revealed suggestive evidence for association at 29 genomic loci (p <10-5) but no significant association reflecting its limited power. The suggestive associations highlight candidate genes that are implicated in epileptogenesis and neurodevelopment. Conclusion: This first GWAS of AED response in GGE provides a comprehensive reference of SNP associations for hypothesis-driven candidate gene analyses in upcoming pharmacogenetic studies.
Background: Microdeletions are known to confer risk to epilepsy, particularly at genomic rearrangement ‘hotspot’ loci. However, microdeletion burden not overlapping these regions or within different epilepsy subtypes has not been ascertained.
Objective: To decipher the role of microdeletions outside hotspots loci and risk assessment by epilepsy subtype.
Methods: We assessed the burden, frequency and genomic content of rare, large microdeletions found in a previously published cohort of 1366 patients with genetic generalised epilepsy (GGE) in addition to two sets of additional unpublished genome-wide microdeletions found in 281 patients with rolandic epilepsy (RE) and 807 patients with adult focal epilepsy (AFE), totalling 2454 cases. Microdeletions were assessed in a combined and subtype-specific approaches against 6746 controls.
Results: When hotspots are considered, we detected an enrichment of microdeletions in the combined epilepsy analysis (adjusted p=1.06×10−6,OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.51 to 2.35). Epilepsy subtype-specific analyses showed that hotspot microdeletions in the GGE subgroup contribute most of the overall signal (adjusted p=9.79×10−12, OR 7.45, 95% CI 4.20–13.5). Outside hotspots , microdeletions were enriched in the GGE cohort for neurodevelopmental genes (adjusted p=9.13×10−3,OR 2.85, 95% CI 1.62–4.94). No additional signal was observed for RE and AFE. Still, gene-content analysis identified known (NRXN1, RBFOX1 and PCDH7) and novel (LOC102723362) candidate genes across epilepsy subtypes that were not deleted in controls.
Conclusions: Our results show a heterogeneous effect of recurrent and non-recurrent microdeletions as part of the genetic architecture of GGE and a minor contribution in the aetiology of RE and AFE.
Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of brivaracetam (BRV) in a severely drug refractory cohort of patients with epileptic encephalopathies (EE).
Method: A multicenter, retrospective cohort study recruiting all patients treated with EE who began treatment with BRV in an enrolling epilepsy center between 2016 and 2017.
Results: Forty-four patients (27 male [61%], mean age 29 years, range 6 to 62) were treated with BRV. The retention rate was 65% at 3 months, 52% at 6 months and 41% at 12 months. A mean retention time of 5 months resulted in a cumulative exposure to BRV of 310 months. Three patients were seizure free during the baseline. At 3 months, 20 (45%, 20/44 as per intention-to-treat analysis considering all patients that started BRV including three who were seizure free during baseline) were either seizure free (n = 4; 9%, three of them already seizure-free at baseline) or reported at least 25% (n = 4; 9%) or 50% (n = 12; 27%) reduction in seizures. An increase in seizure frequency was reported in two (5%) patients, while there was no change in the seizure frequency of the other patients. A 50% long-term responder rate was apparent in 19 patients (43%), with two (5%) free from seizures for more than six months and in nine patients (20%, with one [2 %] free from seizures) for more than 12 months. Treatment-emergent adverse events were predominantly of psychobehavioural nature and were observed in 16%.
Significance: In this retrospective analysis the rate of patients with a 50% seizure reduction under BRV proofed to be similar to those seen in regulatory trials for focal epilepsies. BRV appears to be safe and relatively well tolerated in EE and might be considered in patients with psychobehavioral adverse events while on levetiracetam.
Juvenile myoclonic epilepsy (JME) is a common epilepsy syndrome characterized by bilateral myoclonic and tonic-clonic seizures typically starting in adolescence and responding well to medication. Misdiagnosis of a more severe progressive myoclonus epilepsy (PME) as JME has been suggested as a cause of drug-resistance. Medical records of the Epilepsy Center Hessen-Marburg between 2005 and 2014 were automatically selected using keywords and manually reviewed regarding the presence of a JME diagnosis at any timepoint. The identified patients were evaluated regarding seizure outcome and drug resistance according to ILAE criteria. 87/168 identified JME patients were seizure-free at last follow-up including 61 drug-responsive patients (group NDR). Seventy-eight patients were not seizure-free including 26 drug-resistant patients (group DR). Valproate was the most efficacious AED. The JME diagnosis was revised in 7 patients of group DR including 6 in whom the diagnosis had already been questioned or revised during clinical follow-up. One of these was finally diagnosed with PME (genetically confirmed Lafora disease) based on genetic testing. She was initially reviewed at age 29 yrs and considered to be inconsistent with PME. Intellectual disability (p = 0.025), cognitive impairment (p < 0.001), febrile seizures in first-degree relatives (p = 0.023) and prominent dialeptic seizures (p = 0.009) where significantly more frequent in group DR. Individuals with PME are rarely found among drug-resistant alleged JME patients in a tertiary epilepsy center. Even a very detailed review by experienced epileptologists may not identify the presence of PME before the typical features evolve underpinning the need for early genetic testing in drug-resistant JME patients.
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.
Genetic generalised epilepsy (GGE) is the most common form of genetic epilepsy, accounting for 20% of all epilepsies. Genomic copy number variations (CNVs) constitute important genetic risk factors of common GGE syndromes. In our present genome-wide burden analysis, large (≥ 400 kb) and rare (< 1%) autosomal microdeletions with high calling confidence (≥ 200 markers) were assessed by the Affymetrix SNP 6.0 array in European case-control cohorts of 1,366 GGE patients and 5,234 ancestry-matched controls. We aimed to: 1) assess the microdeletion burden in common GGE syndromes, 2) estimate the relative contribution of recurrent microdeletions at genomic rearrangement hotspots and non-recurrent microdeletions, and 3) identify potential candidate genes for GGE. We found a significant excess of microdeletions in 7.3% of GGE patients compared to 4.0% in controls (P = 1.8 x 10-7; OR = 1.9). Recurrent microdeletions at seven known genomic hotspots accounted for 36.9% of all microdeletions identified in the GGE cohort and showed a 7.5-fold increased burden (P = 2.6 x 10-17) relative to controls. Microdeletions affecting either a gene previously implicated in neurodevelopmental disorders (P = 8.0 x 10-18, OR = 4.6) or an evolutionarily conserved brain-expressed gene related to autism spectrum disorder (P = 1.3 x 10-12, OR = 4.1) were significantly enriched in the GGE patients. Microdeletions found only in GGE patients harboured a high proportion of genes previously associated with epilepsy and neuropsychiatric disorders (NRXN1, RBFOX1, PCDH7, KCNA2, EPM2A, RORB, PLCB1). Our results demonstrate that the significantly increased burden of large and rare microdeletions in GGE patients is largely confined to recurrent hotspot microdeletions and microdeletions affecting neurodevelopmental genes, suggesting a strong impact of fundamental neurodevelopmental processes in the pathogenesis of common GGE syndromes.