Erik Greb

NEW ORLEANS – The onset of pediatric refractory status epilepticus follows a circadian pattern, according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. The number of episodes is greatest between 10 a.m. and 11 a.m. and smallest between 10 p.m. and 11 p.m.

“Our findings may inform the increase in preventive monitoring, such as video monitoring or seizure-tracking devices for patients,” said Justice Clark, MPH, a program coordinator at Boston Children’s Hospital. “They may also inform chronotherapeutic strategies.”

Research suggests that various types of seizures cluster at different times of the day. Data about the circadian distribution of status epilepticus, however, are limited.

Ms. Clark and colleagues conducted a prospective observational study at 25 hospitals in the United States and Canada from June 2011 to January 2018. Eligible participants were between ages 1 month and 21 years, had focal or generalized convulsive status epilepticus, and had failed to respond to one benzodiazepine and one nonbenzodiazepine antiseizure medication. For patients with more than one episode of refractory status epilepticus during the study, the researchers included only the first episode.

The investigators examined whether the temporal distribution of pediatric refractory status epilepticus onset followed a circadian pattern using a cosinor analysis with a 12-hour cycle. They used the midline-estimating statistic of rhythm (MESOR) technique to estimate the mean number of refractory status epilepticus episodes per hour if onset was evenly distributed. The amplitude in this analysis was the difference in number of episodes per hour between the MESOR and the peak or the MESOR and the trough.

Ms. Clark and her colleagues included 300 patients in their analysis, each of whom had one episode. Approximately 45% of participants were female. The population’s median age was 4.2 years, and the median duration of status epilepticus was 120 minutes.

The MESOR was 12.5 episodes per hour, and the amplitude was 2.4 episodes per hour, indicating that the distribution was not even over 24 hours. The peak number of onsets was between 10 a.m. and 11 a.m., and the trough was between 10 p.m. and 11 p.m.

A secondary analysis examined the circadian distribution of time to treatment with rescue medications. The distribution of time to treatment with the first benzodiazepine did not differ significantly from a uniform distribution. The time to treatment with the first nonbenzodiazepine antiseizure medication, however, was not uniformly distributed. The longest time to treatment occurred between 3 a.m. and 4 a.m., and the shortest time was between 3 p.m. and 4 p.m. “Although fewer refractory status epilepticus episodes occurred at night, the time to antiseizure medication administration was the longest [during that period]. Thus, nighttime refractory status epilepticus episodes may be at higher risk for delayed treatment,” said Ms. Clark. A limitation of this analysis is that it was influenced by outliers, she added.

The Pediatric Epilepsy Research Foundation and the Epilepsy Research Fund supported the study.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Clark J et al. AES 2018. Abstract 3.426.

NEW ORLEANS – The onset of pediatric refractory status epilepticus follows a circadian pattern, according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. The number of episodes is greatest between 10 a.m. and 11 a.m. and smallest between 10 p.m. and 11 p.m.

“Our findings may inform the increase in preventive monitoring, such as video monitoring or seizure-tracking devices for patients,” said Justice Clark, MPH, a program coordinator at Boston Children’s Hospital. “They may also inform chronotherapeutic strategies.”

Research suggests that various types of seizures cluster at different times of the day. Data about the circadian distribution of status epilepticus, however, are limited.

Ms. Clark and colleagues conducted a prospective observational study at 25 hospitals in the United States and Canada from June 2011 to January 2018. Eligible participants were between ages 1 month and 21 years, had focal or generalized convulsive status epilepticus, and had failed to respond to one benzodiazepine and one nonbenzodiazepine antiseizure medication. For patients with more than one episode of refractory status epilepticus during the study, the researchers included only the first episode.

The investigators examined whether the temporal distribution of pediatric refractory status epilepticus onset followed a circadian pattern using a cosinor analysis with a 12-hour cycle. They used the midline-estimating statistic of rhythm (MESOR) technique to estimate the mean number of refractory status epilepticus episodes per hour if onset was evenly distributed. The amplitude in this analysis was the difference in number of episodes per hour between the MESOR and the peak or the MESOR and the trough.

Ms. Clark and her colleagues included 300 patients in their analysis, each of whom had one episode. Approximately 45% of participants were female. The population’s median age was 4.2 years, and the median duration of status epilepticus was 120 minutes.

The MESOR was 12.5 episodes per hour, and the amplitude was 2.4 episodes per hour, indicating that the distribution was not even over 24 hours. The peak number of onsets was between 10 a.m. and 11 a.m., and the trough was between 10 p.m. and 11 p.m.

A secondary analysis examined the circadian distribution of time to treatment with rescue medications. The distribution of time to treatment with the first benzodiazepine did not differ significantly from a uniform distribution. The time to treatment with the first nonbenzodiazepine antiseizure medication, however, was not uniformly distributed. The longest time to treatment occurred between 3 a.m. and 4 a.m., and the shortest time was between 3 p.m. and 4 p.m. “Although fewer refractory status epilepticus episodes occurred at night, the time to antiseizure medication administration was the longest [during that period]. Thus, nighttime refractory status epilepticus episodes may be at higher risk for delayed treatment,” said Ms. Clark. A limitation of this analysis is that it was influenced by outliers, she added.

The Pediatric Epilepsy Research Foundation and the Epilepsy Research Fund supported the study.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Clark J et al. AES 2018. Abstract 3.426.

NEW ORLEANS – The onset of pediatric refractory status epilepticus follows a circadian pattern, according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. The number of episodes is greatest between 10 a.m. and 11 a.m. and smallest between 10 p.m. and 11 p.m.

“Our findings may inform the increase in preventive monitoring, such as video monitoring or seizure-tracking devices for patients,” said Justice Clark, MPH, a program coordinator at Boston Children’s Hospital. “They may also inform chronotherapeutic strategies.”

Research suggests that various types of seizures cluster at different times of the day. Data about the circadian distribution of status epilepticus, however, are limited.

Ms. Clark and colleagues conducted a prospective observational study at 25 hospitals in the United States and Canada from June 2011 to January 2018. Eligible participants were between ages 1 month and 21 years, had focal or generalized convulsive status epilepticus, and had failed to respond to one benzodiazepine and one nonbenzodiazepine antiseizure medication. For patients with more than one episode of refractory status epilepticus during the study, the researchers included only the first episode.

The investigators examined whether the temporal distribution of pediatric refractory status epilepticus onset followed a circadian pattern using a cosinor analysis with a 12-hour cycle. They used the midline-estimating statistic of rhythm (MESOR) technique to estimate the mean number of refractory status epilepticus episodes per hour if onset was evenly distributed. The amplitude in this analysis was the difference in number of episodes per hour between the MESOR and the peak or the MESOR and the trough.

Ms. Clark and her colleagues included 300 patients in their analysis, each of whom had one episode. Approximately 45% of participants were female. The population’s median age was 4.2 years, and the median duration of status epilepticus was 120 minutes.

The MESOR was 12.5 episodes per hour, and the amplitude was 2.4 episodes per hour, indicating that the distribution was not even over 24 hours. The peak number of onsets was between 10 a.m. and 11 a.m., and the trough was between 10 p.m. and 11 p.m.

A secondary analysis examined the circadian distribution of time to treatment with rescue medications. The distribution of time to treatment with the first benzodiazepine did not differ significantly from a uniform distribution. The time to treatment with the first nonbenzodiazepine antiseizure medication, however, was not uniformly distributed. The longest time to treatment occurred between 3 a.m. and 4 a.m., and the shortest time was between 3 p.m. and 4 p.m. “Although fewer refractory status epilepticus episodes occurred at night, the time to antiseizure medication administration was the longest [during that period]. Thus, nighttime refractory status epilepticus episodes may be at higher risk for delayed treatment,” said Ms. Clark. A limitation of this analysis is that it was influenced by outliers, she added.

The Pediatric Epilepsy Research Foundation and the Epilepsy Research Fund supported the study.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Clark J et al. AES 2018. Abstract 3.426.

Alcohol consumption and psychological distress are associated with possible REM sleep behavior disorder (RBD), according to a population-based cohort study published in Neurology. In addition, the results also replicate previous findings of an association between possible RBD and smoking, low education, and male sex.

The risk factors for RBD have been studied comparatively little. “While much is still unknown about RBD, it can be caused by medications or it may be an early sign of another neurologic condition like Parkinson’s disease, dementia with Lewy bodies, or multiple system atrophy,” according to Ronald B. Postuma, MD, an associate professor at McGill University, Montreal. “Identifying lifestyle and personal risk factors linked to this sleep disorder may lead to finding ways to reduce the chances of developing it.”

To assess sociodemographic, socioeconomic, and clinical correlates of possible RBD, Dr. Postuma and his colleagues examined baseline data collected between 2012 and 2015 in the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA), which included 30,097 participants. To screen for possible RBD, the CLSA researchers asked patients, “Have you ever been told, or suspected yourself, that you seem to ‘act out your dreams’ while asleep [e.g., punching, flailing your arms in the air, making running movements, etc.]?” Participants answered additional questions to rule out RBD mimics. Patients with symptom onset before age 20 years, positive apnea screen, or a diagnosis of dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, parkinsonism, or Parkinson’s disease were excluded from analysis.

In all, 3,271 participants screened positive for possible RBD. After the investigators excluded participants with potential mimics, 958 patients (about 3.2% of the total population) remained in the analysis. Approximately 59% of patients with possible RBD were male, compared with 42% of controls. Patients with possible RBD were more likely to be married, in a common-law relationship, or widowed.

Participants with possible RBD had slightly less education (estimated mean, 13.2 years vs. 13.6 years) and lower income, compared with controls. Participants with possible RBD retired at a slightly younger age (57.5 years vs. 58.6 years) and were more likely to have retired because of health concerns (28.9% vs. 22.0%), compared with controls.

In addition, patients with possible RBD were more likely to drink more and to be moderate to heavy drinkers than controls; they were also more likely to be current or past smokers. Antidepressant use was more frequent and psychological distress was greater among participants with possible RBD.

When the investigators performed a multivariable logistic regression analysis, the associations between possible RBD and male sex and relationship status remained. Lower educational level, but not income level, also remained associated with possible RBD. Furthermore, retirement age and having reported retirement because of health concerns remained significantly associated with possible RBD, as did the amount of alcohol consumed weekly and moderate to heavy drinking. Sensitivity analyses did not change the results significantly.

One of the study’s limitations is its reliance on self-report to identify participants with possible RBD, the authors wrote. The prevalence of possible RBD in the study was 3.2%, but research using polysomnography has found a prevalence of about 1%. Thus, the majority of cases in this study may have other disorders such as restless legs syndrome or periodic limb movements. Furthermore, many participants who enact their dreams (such as unmarried people) are likely unaware of it. Finally, the researchers did not measure several variables of interest, such as consumption of caffeinated products.

“The main advantages of our current study are the large sample size; the systematic population-based sampling; the capacity to adjust for diverse potential confounding variables, including mental illness; and the ability to screen out RBD mimics,” the authors concluded.
 

[email protected]

SOURCE: Postuma RB et al. Neurology. 2018 Dec 26. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000006849.

Alcohol consumption and psychological distress are associated with possible REM sleep behavior disorder (RBD), according to a population-based cohort study published in Neurology. In addition, the results also replicate previous findings of an association between possible RBD and smoking, low education, and male sex.

The risk factors for RBD have been studied comparatively little. “While much is still unknown about RBD, it can be caused by medications or it may be an early sign of another neurologic condition like Parkinson’s disease, dementia with Lewy bodies, or multiple system atrophy,” according to Ronald B. Postuma, MD, an associate professor at McGill University, Montreal. “Identifying lifestyle and personal risk factors linked to this sleep disorder may lead to finding ways to reduce the chances of developing it.”

To assess sociodemographic, socioeconomic, and clinical correlates of possible RBD, Dr. Postuma and his colleagues examined baseline data collected between 2012 and 2015 in the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA), which included 30,097 participants. To screen for possible RBD, the CLSA researchers asked patients, “Have you ever been told, or suspected yourself, that you seem to ‘act out your dreams’ while asleep [e.g., punching, flailing your arms in the air, making running movements, etc.]?” Participants answered additional questions to rule out RBD mimics. Patients with symptom onset before age 20 years, positive apnea screen, or a diagnosis of dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, parkinsonism, or Parkinson’s disease were excluded from analysis.

In all, 3,271 participants screened positive for possible RBD. After the investigators excluded participants with potential mimics, 958 patients (about 3.2% of the total population) remained in the analysis. Approximately 59% of patients with possible RBD were male, compared with 42% of controls. Patients with possible RBD were more likely to be married, in a common-law relationship, or widowed.

Participants with possible RBD had slightly less education (estimated mean, 13.2 years vs. 13.6 years) and lower income, compared with controls. Participants with possible RBD retired at a slightly younger age (57.5 years vs. 58.6 years) and were more likely to have retired because of health concerns (28.9% vs. 22.0%), compared with controls.

In addition, patients with possible RBD were more likely to drink more and to be moderate to heavy drinkers than controls; they were also more likely to be current or past smokers. Antidepressant use was more frequent and psychological distress was greater among participants with possible RBD.

When the investigators performed a multivariable logistic regression analysis, the associations between possible RBD and male sex and relationship status remained. Lower educational level, but not income level, also remained associated with possible RBD. Furthermore, retirement age and having reported retirement because of health concerns remained significantly associated with possible RBD, as did the amount of alcohol consumed weekly and moderate to heavy drinking. Sensitivity analyses did not change the results significantly.

One of the study’s limitations is its reliance on self-report to identify participants with possible RBD, the authors wrote. The prevalence of possible RBD in the study was 3.2%, but research using polysomnography has found a prevalence of about 1%. Thus, the majority of cases in this study may have other disorders such as restless legs syndrome or periodic limb movements. Furthermore, many participants who enact their dreams (such as unmarried people) are likely unaware of it. Finally, the researchers did not measure several variables of interest, such as consumption of caffeinated products.

“The main advantages of our current study are the large sample size; the systematic population-based sampling; the capacity to adjust for diverse potential confounding variables, including mental illness; and the ability to screen out RBD mimics,” the authors concluded.
 

[email protected]

SOURCE: Postuma RB et al. Neurology. 2018 Dec 26. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000006849.

Alcohol consumption and psychological distress are associated with possible REM sleep behavior disorder (RBD), according to a population-based cohort study published in Neurology. In addition, the results also replicate previous findings of an association between possible RBD and smoking, low education, and male sex.

The risk factors for RBD have been studied comparatively little. “While much is still unknown about RBD, it can be caused by medications or it may be an early sign of another neurologic condition like Parkinson’s disease, dementia with Lewy bodies, or multiple system atrophy,” according to Ronald B. Postuma, MD, an associate professor at McGill University, Montreal. “Identifying lifestyle and personal risk factors linked to this sleep disorder may lead to finding ways to reduce the chances of developing it.”

To assess sociodemographic, socioeconomic, and clinical correlates of possible RBD, Dr. Postuma and his colleagues examined baseline data collected between 2012 and 2015 in the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA), which included 30,097 participants. To screen for possible RBD, the CLSA researchers asked patients, “Have you ever been told, or suspected yourself, that you seem to ‘act out your dreams’ while asleep [e.g., punching, flailing your arms in the air, making running movements, etc.]?” Participants answered additional questions to rule out RBD mimics. Patients with symptom onset before age 20 years, positive apnea screen, or a diagnosis of dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, parkinsonism, or Parkinson’s disease were excluded from analysis.

In all, 3,271 participants screened positive for possible RBD. After the investigators excluded participants with potential mimics, 958 patients (about 3.2% of the total population) remained in the analysis. Approximately 59% of patients with possible RBD were male, compared with 42% of controls. Patients with possible RBD were more likely to be married, in a common-law relationship, or widowed.

Participants with possible RBD had slightly less education (estimated mean, 13.2 years vs. 13.6 years) and lower income, compared with controls. Participants with possible RBD retired at a slightly younger age (57.5 years vs. 58.6 years) and were more likely to have retired because of health concerns (28.9% vs. 22.0%), compared with controls.

In addition, patients with possible RBD were more likely to drink more and to be moderate to heavy drinkers than controls; they were also more likely to be current or past smokers. Antidepressant use was more frequent and psychological distress was greater among participants with possible RBD.

When the investigators performed a multivariable logistic regression analysis, the associations between possible RBD and male sex and relationship status remained. Lower educational level, but not income level, also remained associated with possible RBD. Furthermore, retirement age and having reported retirement because of health concerns remained significantly associated with possible RBD, as did the amount of alcohol consumed weekly and moderate to heavy drinking. Sensitivity analyses did not change the results significantly.

One of the study’s limitations is its reliance on self-report to identify participants with possible RBD, the authors wrote. The prevalence of possible RBD in the study was 3.2%, but research using polysomnography has found a prevalence of about 1%. Thus, the majority of cases in this study may have other disorders such as restless legs syndrome or periodic limb movements. Furthermore, many participants who enact their dreams (such as unmarried people) are likely unaware of it. Finally, the researchers did not measure several variables of interest, such as consumption of caffeinated products.

“The main advantages of our current study are the large sample size; the systematic population-based sampling; the capacity to adjust for diverse potential confounding variables, including mental illness; and the ability to screen out RBD mimics,” the authors concluded.
 

[email protected]

SOURCE: Postuma RB et al. Neurology. 2018 Dec 26. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000006849.

Daclizumab beta has benefits over interferon beta-1a on measures of disability and function in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (MS), according to research published in the December 2018 issue of the Multiple Sclerosis Journal. The benefits are observed in the overall patient population, as well as in subgroups of patients based on demographic and disease characteristics.

Biogen and AbbVie, the manufacturers of daclizumab beta, voluntarily removed the therapy from the market in March 2018 because of safety concerns that included reports of severe liver damage and conditions associated with the immune system.

The phase 3 DECIDE study (NCT01064401) compared the safety and efficacy of subcutaneous daclizumab beta (150 mg) every 4 weeks with those of intramuscular interferon beta-1a (30 mcg) once weekly in patients with relapsing-remitting MS. Daclizumab beta reduced the risk of 24-week confirmed disability progression as assessed by the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) by 27%, compared with interferon beta-1a. Daclizumab beta also was associated with a greater median change from baseline to week 96 in MS Functional Composite (MSFC) score and a 24% reduction in the risk of clinically meaningful worsening on the physical impact subscale of the patient-reported 29-Item MS Impact Scale (MSIS-29 PHYS).

To shed light on the treatment’s effects in various demographic groups and in patients with specific clinical characteristics, Stanley L. Cohan, MD, PhD, medical director of Providence MS Center in Portland, Ore., and colleagues conducted a post hoc analysis of DECIDE data to examine the treatment effects of daclizumab beta and interferon beta-1a on patient disability or impairment in specific patient subgroups. The investigators examined results according to demographic characteristics, such as age (that is, 35 years or younger and older than 35 years) and sex. They also examined results in subgroups with the following baseline disease characteristics: disability (as defined by EDSS score), relapses in the previous 12 months, disease duration, presence of gadolinium enhancing lesions, T2 hyperintense lesion volume, disease activity, prior use of disease-modifying treatment, and prior use of interferon beta.

Dr. Cohan and colleagues focused on the following three outcome measures: 24-week confirmed disability progression (as measured by EDSS), 24-week sustained worsening on the MSFC, and the proportion of patients with clinically meaningful worsening in MSIS-29 PHYS at week 96. The researchers defined 24-week confirmed disability progression as an increase in the EDSS score of one or more points from a baseline score of 1 or higher or 1.5 points or more from a baseline score of 0 as confirmed after 24 weeks. They defined 24-week sustained worsening on the MSFC as worsening of 20% or more on the Timed 25-Foot Walk, worsening of 20% or more on Nine-Hole Peg Test, or a decrease of four or more points on the Symbol Digit Modalities Test sustained for 24 weeks.

Of the 1,841 patients enrolled in DECIDE, 922 were randomized to interferon beta-1a, and 919 were randomized to daclizumab beta. The treatment groups were well balanced in terms of demographic characteristics. Patients’ mean age was approximately 36 years, 68% of participants were female, and 90% of patients were white. Mean time since diagnosis at baseline was about 4 years, mean number of relapses in the previous year was 1.6, and mean baseline EDSS score was 2.5.

Daclizumab beta was associated with a lower risk of 24-week confirmed disability progression, compared with interferon beta-1a, in all subgroups. Patients aged 35 years or younger had the greatest risk reduction.

The proportion of patients who had 24-week sustained worsening on the MSFC at week 96 was 24% for daclizumab beta and 28% for interferon beta-1a. In the whole study population, daclizumab beta reduced the risk of this outcome by 20%, compared with interferon beta-1a. Daclizumab beta resulted in improved outcomes among all subgroups, compared with interferon beta-1a.

In addition, daclizumab beta reduced the risk of a clinically meaningful worsening of MSIS-29 PHYS at week 96 by 24%, compared with interferon beta-1a. The investigators observed trends favoring daclizumab beta in all subgroups.

“These analyses should be interpreted as exploratory and hypothesis-generating for future studies,” said Dr. Cohan and colleagues. They observed that some of the subgroups analyzed had small sample sizes and that no adjustments were made for multiple testing. Nevertheless, the results suggest that daclizumab beta has superior efficacy, compared with interferon beta-1a, regardless of patients’ demographic and disease characteristics, they concluded.

Biogen and AbbVie Biotherapeutics supported the study.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Cohan S et al. Mult Scler J. 2018. doi: 10.1177/1352458517735190.

This article was updated on 3/22/19.

Daclizumab beta has benefits over interferon beta-1a on measures of disability and function in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (MS), according to research published in the December 2018 issue of the Multiple Sclerosis Journal. The benefits are observed in the overall patient population, as well as in subgroups of patients based on demographic and disease characteristics.

Biogen and AbbVie, the manufacturers of daclizumab beta, voluntarily removed the therapy from the market in March 2018 because of safety concerns that included reports of severe liver damage and conditions associated with the immune system.

The phase 3 DECIDE study (NCT01064401) compared the safety and efficacy of subcutaneous daclizumab beta (150 mg) every 4 weeks with those of intramuscular interferon beta-1a (30 mcg) once weekly in patients with relapsing-remitting MS. Daclizumab beta reduced the risk of 24-week confirmed disability progression as assessed by the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) by 27%, compared with interferon beta-1a. Daclizumab beta also was associated with a greater median change from baseline to week 96 in MS Functional Composite (MSFC) score and a 24% reduction in the risk of clinically meaningful worsening on the physical impact subscale of the patient-reported 29-Item MS Impact Scale (MSIS-29 PHYS).

To shed light on the treatment’s effects in various demographic groups and in patients with specific clinical characteristics, Stanley L. Cohan, MD, PhD, medical director of Providence MS Center in Portland, Ore., and colleagues conducted a post hoc analysis of DECIDE data to examine the treatment effects of daclizumab beta and interferon beta-1a on patient disability or impairment in specific patient subgroups. The investigators examined results according to demographic characteristics, such as age (that is, 35 years or younger and older than 35 years) and sex. They also examined results in subgroups with the following baseline disease characteristics: disability (as defined by EDSS score), relapses in the previous 12 months, disease duration, presence of gadolinium enhancing lesions, T2 hyperintense lesion volume, disease activity, prior use of disease-modifying treatment, and prior use of interferon beta.

Dr. Cohan and colleagues focused on the following three outcome measures: 24-week confirmed disability progression (as measured by EDSS), 24-week sustained worsening on the MSFC, and the proportion of patients with clinically meaningful worsening in MSIS-29 PHYS at week 96. The researchers defined 24-week confirmed disability progression as an increase in the EDSS score of one or more points from a baseline score of 1 or higher or 1.5 points or more from a baseline score of 0 as confirmed after 24 weeks. They defined 24-week sustained worsening on the MSFC as worsening of 20% or more on the Timed 25-Foot Walk, worsening of 20% or more on Nine-Hole Peg Test, or a decrease of four or more points on the Symbol Digit Modalities Test sustained for 24 weeks.

Of the 1,841 patients enrolled in DECIDE, 922 were randomized to interferon beta-1a, and 919 were randomized to daclizumab beta. The treatment groups were well balanced in terms of demographic characteristics. Patients’ mean age was approximately 36 years, 68% of participants were female, and 90% of patients were white. Mean time since diagnosis at baseline was about 4 years, mean number of relapses in the previous year was 1.6, and mean baseline EDSS score was 2.5.

Daclizumab beta was associated with a lower risk of 24-week confirmed disability progression, compared with interferon beta-1a, in all subgroups. Patients aged 35 years or younger had the greatest risk reduction.

The proportion of patients who had 24-week sustained worsening on the MSFC at week 96 was 24% for daclizumab beta and 28% for interferon beta-1a. In the whole study population, daclizumab beta reduced the risk of this outcome by 20%, compared with interferon beta-1a. Daclizumab beta resulted in improved outcomes among all subgroups, compared with interferon beta-1a.

In addition, daclizumab beta reduced the risk of a clinically meaningful worsening of MSIS-29 PHYS at week 96 by 24%, compared with interferon beta-1a. The investigators observed trends favoring daclizumab beta in all subgroups.

“These analyses should be interpreted as exploratory and hypothesis-generating for future studies,” said Dr. Cohan and colleagues. They observed that some of the subgroups analyzed had small sample sizes and that no adjustments were made for multiple testing. Nevertheless, the results suggest that daclizumab beta has superior efficacy, compared with interferon beta-1a, regardless of patients’ demographic and disease characteristics, they concluded.

Biogen and AbbVie Biotherapeutics supported the study.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Cohan S et al. Mult Scler J. 2018. doi: 10.1177/1352458517735190.

This article was updated on 3/22/19.

Daclizumab beta has benefits over interferon beta-1a on measures of disability and function in patients with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (MS), according to research published in the December 2018 issue of the Multiple Sclerosis Journal. The benefits are observed in the overall patient population, as well as in subgroups of patients based on demographic and disease characteristics.

Biogen and AbbVie, the manufacturers of daclizumab beta, voluntarily removed the therapy from the market in March 2018 because of safety concerns that included reports of severe liver damage and conditions associated with the immune system.

The phase 3 DECIDE study (NCT01064401) compared the safety and efficacy of subcutaneous daclizumab beta (150 mg) every 4 weeks with those of intramuscular interferon beta-1a (30 mcg) once weekly in patients with relapsing-remitting MS. Daclizumab beta reduced the risk of 24-week confirmed disability progression as assessed by the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) by 27%, compared with interferon beta-1a. Daclizumab beta also was associated with a greater median change from baseline to week 96 in MS Functional Composite (MSFC) score and a 24% reduction in the risk of clinically meaningful worsening on the physical impact subscale of the patient-reported 29-Item MS Impact Scale (MSIS-29 PHYS).

To shed light on the treatment’s effects in various demographic groups and in patients with specific clinical characteristics, Stanley L. Cohan, MD, PhD, medical director of Providence MS Center in Portland, Ore., and colleagues conducted a post hoc analysis of DECIDE data to examine the treatment effects of daclizumab beta and interferon beta-1a on patient disability or impairment in specific patient subgroups. The investigators examined results according to demographic characteristics, such as age (that is, 35 years or younger and older than 35 years) and sex. They also examined results in subgroups with the following baseline disease characteristics: disability (as defined by EDSS score), relapses in the previous 12 months, disease duration, presence of gadolinium enhancing lesions, T2 hyperintense lesion volume, disease activity, prior use of disease-modifying treatment, and prior use of interferon beta.

Dr. Cohan and colleagues focused on the following three outcome measures: 24-week confirmed disability progression (as measured by EDSS), 24-week sustained worsening on the MSFC, and the proportion of patients with clinically meaningful worsening in MSIS-29 PHYS at week 96. The researchers defined 24-week confirmed disability progression as an increase in the EDSS score of one or more points from a baseline score of 1 or higher or 1.5 points or more from a baseline score of 0 as confirmed after 24 weeks. They defined 24-week sustained worsening on the MSFC as worsening of 20% or more on the Timed 25-Foot Walk, worsening of 20% or more on Nine-Hole Peg Test, or a decrease of four or more points on the Symbol Digit Modalities Test sustained for 24 weeks.

Of the 1,841 patients enrolled in DECIDE, 922 were randomized to interferon beta-1a, and 919 were randomized to daclizumab beta. The treatment groups were well balanced in terms of demographic characteristics. Patients’ mean age was approximately 36 years, 68% of participants were female, and 90% of patients were white. Mean time since diagnosis at baseline was about 4 years, mean number of relapses in the previous year was 1.6, and mean baseline EDSS score was 2.5.

Daclizumab beta was associated with a lower risk of 24-week confirmed disability progression, compared with interferon beta-1a, in all subgroups. Patients aged 35 years or younger had the greatest risk reduction.

The proportion of patients who had 24-week sustained worsening on the MSFC at week 96 was 24% for daclizumab beta and 28% for interferon beta-1a. In the whole study population, daclizumab beta reduced the risk of this outcome by 20%, compared with interferon beta-1a. Daclizumab beta resulted in improved outcomes among all subgroups, compared with interferon beta-1a.

In addition, daclizumab beta reduced the risk of a clinically meaningful worsening of MSIS-29 PHYS at week 96 by 24%, compared with interferon beta-1a. The investigators observed trends favoring daclizumab beta in all subgroups.

“These analyses should be interpreted as exploratory and hypothesis-generating for future studies,” said Dr. Cohan and colleagues. They observed that some of the subgroups analyzed had small sample sizes and that no adjustments were made for multiple testing. Nevertheless, the results suggest that daclizumab beta has superior efficacy, compared with interferon beta-1a, regardless of patients’ demographic and disease characteristics, they concluded.

Biogen and AbbVie Biotherapeutics supported the study.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Cohan S et al. Mult Scler J. 2018. doi: 10.1177/1352458517735190.

This article was updated on 3/22/19.

In a position statement published online ahead of print Jan. 2 in Neurology, the American Academy of Neurology urges uniformity in the laws, policies, and practices related to brain death. Such uniformity would reduce uncertainty and improve patient care, according to the authors. The statement, which was drafted by the AAN’s Brain Death Working Group, also supports the development of uniform policies regarding brain death and its determination within American medical institutions. Finally, the document provides neurologists with guidance for responding to requests for accommodation, including objections to the determination of brain death and to the withdrawal of organ-sustaining technology.

The AAN defines brain death as death resulting from irreversible loss of function of the entire brain. The Uniform Determination of Death Act of 1981 held that brain death and circulatory death (that is, death resulting from irreversible loss of function of the circulatory system) are equivalent, and the AAN acknowledges this equivalence.

The two current medical standards for brain death are the AAN’s 2010 Evidence-Based Guideline Update: Determining Brain Death in Adults and the 2011 Guidelines for the Determination of Brain Death in Infants and Children, which was published by the pediatric section of the Society of Critical Care Medicine, the sections of neurology and critical care of the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Child Neurology Society. “The AAN is unaware of any cases in which compliant application of the brain death guidelines led to inaccurate determination of death with return of any brain function, including consciousness, brainstem reflexes, or ventilatory effort,” according to their 2019 statement.

The only jurisdiction with laws that specifically defer to these standards, however, is Nevada. The vagueness of most states’ laws has contributed to divergent legal interpretations and idiosyncratic standards for determining brain death, according to the statement.

“The AAN believes that a specific, uniform standard for the determination of brain death is critically important to provide the highest quality patient-centered neurologic and end-of-life care,” said James Russell, DO, MS, a neurologist at Lahey Hospital and Medical Center in Burlington, Mass., and lead author of the position statement. “The AAN supports the development of legislation in every state modeled after the Nevada statute, which specifically defers to these current adult and pediatric brain death guidelines and any future updates.”

In addition to uniform institutional policies for determining brain death within U.S. medical facilities, the AAN calls for the development of training programs and credentialing mechanisms for physicians who determine brain death, regardless of their specialties. The association also supports research that enhances understanding of brain death and enhanced professional and public education.

While expressing respect and sympathy for requests for limited accommodation, the AAN asserts that these requests “must be based on the values of the patient, and not those of loved ones or other surrogate decision makers.” The association further observes that physicians have no ethical obligation to provide medical treatment to a deceased patient. New Jersey is the only state that legally obliges physicians to provide indefinite accommodation and continued application of organ-sustaining technology.

“The AAN believes that its members have both the moral authority and professional responsibility, when lawful, to perform a brain death evaluation, including apnea testing, after informing a patient’s loved ones or lawful surrogates of that intention, but without obligation to obtain informed consent,” according to the statement. “This position is analogous to the authority and responsibility historically granted to the medical profession to determine circulatory death without the requirement for additional informed consent.”

If a dispute about indefinite accommodation cannot be resolved, it is acceptable for a physician to withdraw organ-sustaining technology unilaterally over the objection of loved ones when legally permitted, according to the AAN. Such unilateral action is a measure of last resort and does not apply when the patient is a pregnant woman, said the authors. In the latter case, the ethical analysis should focus mainly on the welfare of the fetus.

The AAN provided financial support for the Brain Death Working Group’s efforts. The statement’s authors reported no relevant disclosures. The American Neurological Association and the Child Neurology Society have endorsed the AAN’s position statement.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Russell JA et al. Neurology. 2018 Jan 2. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000006750.
 

In a position statement published online ahead of print Jan. 2 in Neurology, the American Academy of Neurology urges uniformity in the laws, policies, and practices related to brain death. Such uniformity would reduce uncertainty and improve patient care, according to the authors. The statement, which was drafted by the AAN’s Brain Death Working Group, also supports the development of uniform policies regarding brain death and its determination within American medical institutions. Finally, the document provides neurologists with guidance for responding to requests for accommodation, including objections to the determination of brain death and to the withdrawal of organ-sustaining technology.

The AAN defines brain death as death resulting from irreversible loss of function of the entire brain. The Uniform Determination of Death Act of 1981 held that brain death and circulatory death (that is, death resulting from irreversible loss of function of the circulatory system) are equivalent, and the AAN acknowledges this equivalence.

The two current medical standards for brain death are the AAN’s 2010 Evidence-Based Guideline Update: Determining Brain Death in Adults and the 2011 Guidelines for the Determination of Brain Death in Infants and Children, which was published by the pediatric section of the Society of Critical Care Medicine, the sections of neurology and critical care of the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Child Neurology Society. “The AAN is unaware of any cases in which compliant application of the brain death guidelines led to inaccurate determination of death with return of any brain function, including consciousness, brainstem reflexes, or ventilatory effort,” according to their 2019 statement.

The only jurisdiction with laws that specifically defer to these standards, however, is Nevada. The vagueness of most states’ laws has contributed to divergent legal interpretations and idiosyncratic standards for determining brain death, according to the statement.

“The AAN believes that a specific, uniform standard for the determination of brain death is critically important to provide the highest quality patient-centered neurologic and end-of-life care,” said James Russell, DO, MS, a neurologist at Lahey Hospital and Medical Center in Burlington, Mass., and lead author of the position statement. “The AAN supports the development of legislation in every state modeled after the Nevada statute, which specifically defers to these current adult and pediatric brain death guidelines and any future updates.”

In addition to uniform institutional policies for determining brain death within U.S. medical facilities, the AAN calls for the development of training programs and credentialing mechanisms for physicians who determine brain death, regardless of their specialties. The association also supports research that enhances understanding of brain death and enhanced professional and public education.

While expressing respect and sympathy for requests for limited accommodation, the AAN asserts that these requests “must be based on the values of the patient, and not those of loved ones or other surrogate decision makers.” The association further observes that physicians have no ethical obligation to provide medical treatment to a deceased patient. New Jersey is the only state that legally obliges physicians to provide indefinite accommodation and continued application of organ-sustaining technology.

“The AAN believes that its members have both the moral authority and professional responsibility, when lawful, to perform a brain death evaluation, including apnea testing, after informing a patient’s loved ones or lawful surrogates of that intention, but without obligation to obtain informed consent,” according to the statement. “This position is analogous to the authority and responsibility historically granted to the medical profession to determine circulatory death without the requirement for additional informed consent.”

If a dispute about indefinite accommodation cannot be resolved, it is acceptable for a physician to withdraw organ-sustaining technology unilaterally over the objection of loved ones when legally permitted, according to the AAN. Such unilateral action is a measure of last resort and does not apply when the patient is a pregnant woman, said the authors. In the latter case, the ethical analysis should focus mainly on the welfare of the fetus.

The AAN provided financial support for the Brain Death Working Group’s efforts. The statement’s authors reported no relevant disclosures. The American Neurological Association and the Child Neurology Society have endorsed the AAN’s position statement.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Russell JA et al. Neurology. 2018 Jan 2. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000006750.
 

In a position statement published online ahead of print Jan. 2 in Neurology, the American Academy of Neurology urges uniformity in the laws, policies, and practices related to brain death. Such uniformity would reduce uncertainty and improve patient care, according to the authors. The statement, which was drafted by the AAN’s Brain Death Working Group, also supports the development of uniform policies regarding brain death and its determination within American medical institutions. Finally, the document provides neurologists with guidance for responding to requests for accommodation, including objections to the determination of brain death and to the withdrawal of organ-sustaining technology.

The AAN defines brain death as death resulting from irreversible loss of function of the entire brain. The Uniform Determination of Death Act of 1981 held that brain death and circulatory death (that is, death resulting from irreversible loss of function of the circulatory system) are equivalent, and the AAN acknowledges this equivalence.

The two current medical standards for brain death are the AAN’s 2010 Evidence-Based Guideline Update: Determining Brain Death in Adults and the 2011 Guidelines for the Determination of Brain Death in Infants and Children, which was published by the pediatric section of the Society of Critical Care Medicine, the sections of neurology and critical care of the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the Child Neurology Society. “The AAN is unaware of any cases in which compliant application of the brain death guidelines led to inaccurate determination of death with return of any brain function, including consciousness, brainstem reflexes, or ventilatory effort,” according to their 2019 statement.

The only jurisdiction with laws that specifically defer to these standards, however, is Nevada. The vagueness of most states’ laws has contributed to divergent legal interpretations and idiosyncratic standards for determining brain death, according to the statement.

“The AAN believes that a specific, uniform standard for the determination of brain death is critically important to provide the highest quality patient-centered neurologic and end-of-life care,” said James Russell, DO, MS, a neurologist at Lahey Hospital and Medical Center in Burlington, Mass., and lead author of the position statement. “The AAN supports the development of legislation in every state modeled after the Nevada statute, which specifically defers to these current adult and pediatric brain death guidelines and any future updates.”

In addition to uniform institutional policies for determining brain death within U.S. medical facilities, the AAN calls for the development of training programs and credentialing mechanisms for physicians who determine brain death, regardless of their specialties. The association also supports research that enhances understanding of brain death and enhanced professional and public education.

While expressing respect and sympathy for requests for limited accommodation, the AAN asserts that these requests “must be based on the values of the patient, and not those of loved ones or other surrogate decision makers.” The association further observes that physicians have no ethical obligation to provide medical treatment to a deceased patient. New Jersey is the only state that legally obliges physicians to provide indefinite accommodation and continued application of organ-sustaining technology.

“The AAN believes that its members have both the moral authority and professional responsibility, when lawful, to perform a brain death evaluation, including apnea testing, after informing a patient’s loved ones or lawful surrogates of that intention, but without obligation to obtain informed consent,” according to the statement. “This position is analogous to the authority and responsibility historically granted to the medical profession to determine circulatory death without the requirement for additional informed consent.”

If a dispute about indefinite accommodation cannot be resolved, it is acceptable for a physician to withdraw organ-sustaining technology unilaterally over the objection of loved ones when legally permitted, according to the AAN. Such unilateral action is a measure of last resort and does not apply when the patient is a pregnant woman, said the authors. In the latter case, the ethical analysis should focus mainly on the welfare of the fetus.

The AAN provided financial support for the Brain Death Working Group’s efforts. The statement’s authors reported no relevant disclosures. The American Neurological Association and the Child Neurology Society have endorsed the AAN’s position statement.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Russell JA et al. Neurology. 2018 Jan 2. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000006750.
 

Cladribine tablets (3.5 mg/kg) have a favorable adverse event profile and are safe as monotherapy for relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis, according to an integrated analysis of several clinical trials published in Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders.

The drug causes transient lymphopenia, as is to be expected from its mechanism of action, but most patients who receive cladribine do not have grade 3 or 4 lymphopenia, the authors wrote. In general, cladribine is not associated with an increased risk of infections or malignancy.

Data indicate that cladribine’s mechanism of action contributes to its durable clinical effect, despite the brief treatment periods. Clinical trials have provided information about the treatment’s safety and tolerability. To examine the treatment’s long-term safety, Stuart Cook, MD, of New Jersey Medical School, Newark, and his colleagues pooled data for patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) treated with cladribine tablets (3.5 mg/kg) as monotherapy or placebo in three phase 3 clinical trials (CLARITY, CLARITY Extension, and ORACLE-MS) and followed up in the PREMIERE registry. The investigators called these patients the monotherapy oral cohort.

To investigate the potential associations between cladribine and rarer adverse events such as malignancies, Dr. Cook and his colleagues examined data from patients with MS who received cladribine, regardless of the formulation or route of administration, or placebo (the all-exposed cohort). This cohort included data from the ONWARD trial, in which patients received cladribine tablets or placebo in combination with interferon-beta, as well as data from five trials in which patients received parenteral cladribine or placebo.

The monotherapy oral cohort included 923 patients who received cladribine and 641 who received placebo. The median age at enrollment in this cohort was approximately 36 years. The majority of patients were women and disease characteristics were balanced between arms. The all-exposed cohort included 1,926 patients who received cladribine and 802 who received placebo. The demographic characteristics of this cohort were similar to those of the monotherapy oral cohort.

In the monotherapy oral cohort, the incidence rate of treatment-emergent adverse events, in adjusted adverse events per 100 patient-years, was 103.29 for the active group versus 94.26 for controls. Lymphopenia (7.94 vs. 1.06) and decreased lymphocyte count (0.78 vs. 0.10) occurred more frequently in the active group than in the placebo group.

Herpes zoster also occurred more frequently in the cladribine group (0.83 vs. 0.20). However, cladribine was not associated with systemic serious disseminated herpes zoster. Furthermore, the investigators found no overall increased risk of infections, including opportunistic infections, with cladribine tablets versus placebo, except for herpes zoster.

In addition, Dr. Cook and his colleagues found no increase in malignancy rates among patients who received cladribine, compared with those who received placebo. They also found no increase in the incidence of malignancies over time in the cladribine group.

The adverse event profile for cladribine tablets (3.5 mg/kg) as monotherapy has been well characterized, the investigators wrote. The results of this analysis are broadly similar to the short-term adverse event results reported in the individual trials.

EMD Serono and Merck Serono, two affiliates of Merck in Darmstadt, Germany, sponsored the study. Merck manufactures cladribine.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Cook S et al. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2018 Nov 18. doi: 10.1016/j.msard.2018.11.021.

Cladribine tablets (3.5 mg/kg) have a favorable adverse event profile and are safe as monotherapy for relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis, according to an integrated analysis of several clinical trials published in Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders.

The drug causes transient lymphopenia, as is to be expected from its mechanism of action, but most patients who receive cladribine do not have grade 3 or 4 lymphopenia, the authors wrote. In general, cladribine is not associated with an increased risk of infections or malignancy.

Data indicate that cladribine’s mechanism of action contributes to its durable clinical effect, despite the brief treatment periods. Clinical trials have provided information about the treatment’s safety and tolerability. To examine the treatment’s long-term safety, Stuart Cook, MD, of New Jersey Medical School, Newark, and his colleagues pooled data for patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) treated with cladribine tablets (3.5 mg/kg) as monotherapy or placebo in three phase 3 clinical trials (CLARITY, CLARITY Extension, and ORACLE-MS) and followed up in the PREMIERE registry. The investigators called these patients the monotherapy oral cohort.

To investigate the potential associations between cladribine and rarer adverse events such as malignancies, Dr. Cook and his colleagues examined data from patients with MS who received cladribine, regardless of the formulation or route of administration, or placebo (the all-exposed cohort). This cohort included data from the ONWARD trial, in which patients received cladribine tablets or placebo in combination with interferon-beta, as well as data from five trials in which patients received parenteral cladribine or placebo.

The monotherapy oral cohort included 923 patients who received cladribine and 641 who received placebo. The median age at enrollment in this cohort was approximately 36 years. The majority of patients were women and disease characteristics were balanced between arms. The all-exposed cohort included 1,926 patients who received cladribine and 802 who received placebo. The demographic characteristics of this cohort were similar to those of the monotherapy oral cohort.

In the monotherapy oral cohort, the incidence rate of treatment-emergent adverse events, in adjusted adverse events per 100 patient-years, was 103.29 for the active group versus 94.26 for controls. Lymphopenia (7.94 vs. 1.06) and decreased lymphocyte count (0.78 vs. 0.10) occurred more frequently in the active group than in the placebo group.

Herpes zoster also occurred more frequently in the cladribine group (0.83 vs. 0.20). However, cladribine was not associated with systemic serious disseminated herpes zoster. Furthermore, the investigators found no overall increased risk of infections, including opportunistic infections, with cladribine tablets versus placebo, except for herpes zoster.

In addition, Dr. Cook and his colleagues found no increase in malignancy rates among patients who received cladribine, compared with those who received placebo. They also found no increase in the incidence of malignancies over time in the cladribine group.

The adverse event profile for cladribine tablets (3.5 mg/kg) as monotherapy has been well characterized, the investigators wrote. The results of this analysis are broadly similar to the short-term adverse event results reported in the individual trials.

EMD Serono and Merck Serono, two affiliates of Merck in Darmstadt, Germany, sponsored the study. Merck manufactures cladribine.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Cook S et al. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2018 Nov 18. doi: 10.1016/j.msard.2018.11.021.

Cladribine tablets (3.5 mg/kg) have a favorable adverse event profile and are safe as monotherapy for relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis, according to an integrated analysis of several clinical trials published in Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders.

The drug causes transient lymphopenia, as is to be expected from its mechanism of action, but most patients who receive cladribine do not have grade 3 or 4 lymphopenia, the authors wrote. In general, cladribine is not associated with an increased risk of infections or malignancy.

Data indicate that cladribine’s mechanism of action contributes to its durable clinical effect, despite the brief treatment periods. Clinical trials have provided information about the treatment’s safety and tolerability. To examine the treatment’s long-term safety, Stuart Cook, MD, of New Jersey Medical School, Newark, and his colleagues pooled data for patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) treated with cladribine tablets (3.5 mg/kg) as monotherapy or placebo in three phase 3 clinical trials (CLARITY, CLARITY Extension, and ORACLE-MS) and followed up in the PREMIERE registry. The investigators called these patients the monotherapy oral cohort.

To investigate the potential associations between cladribine and rarer adverse events such as malignancies, Dr. Cook and his colleagues examined data from patients with MS who received cladribine, regardless of the formulation or route of administration, or placebo (the all-exposed cohort). This cohort included data from the ONWARD trial, in which patients received cladribine tablets or placebo in combination with interferon-beta, as well as data from five trials in which patients received parenteral cladribine or placebo.

The monotherapy oral cohort included 923 patients who received cladribine and 641 who received placebo. The median age at enrollment in this cohort was approximately 36 years. The majority of patients were women and disease characteristics were balanced between arms. The all-exposed cohort included 1,926 patients who received cladribine and 802 who received placebo. The demographic characteristics of this cohort were similar to those of the monotherapy oral cohort.

In the monotherapy oral cohort, the incidence rate of treatment-emergent adverse events, in adjusted adverse events per 100 patient-years, was 103.29 for the active group versus 94.26 for controls. Lymphopenia (7.94 vs. 1.06) and decreased lymphocyte count (0.78 vs. 0.10) occurred more frequently in the active group than in the placebo group.

Herpes zoster also occurred more frequently in the cladribine group (0.83 vs. 0.20). However, cladribine was not associated with systemic serious disseminated herpes zoster. Furthermore, the investigators found no overall increased risk of infections, including opportunistic infections, with cladribine tablets versus placebo, except for herpes zoster.

In addition, Dr. Cook and his colleagues found no increase in malignancy rates among patients who received cladribine, compared with those who received placebo. They also found no increase in the incidence of malignancies over time in the cladribine group.

The adverse event profile for cladribine tablets (3.5 mg/kg) as monotherapy has been well characterized, the investigators wrote. The results of this analysis are broadly similar to the short-term adverse event results reported in the individual trials.

EMD Serono and Merck Serono, two affiliates of Merck in Darmstadt, Germany, sponsored the study. Merck manufactures cladribine.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Cook S et al. Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2018 Nov 18. doi: 10.1016/j.msard.2018.11.021.

NEW ORLEANS – For patients with Dravet syndrome, a 44% or greater reduction in seizure frequency can be considered a clinically meaningful response, according to a study described at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. A reduction in seizure frequency of between 60% and 68% is associated with Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) ratings of “very much improved,” as assessed by caregivers and investigators.

“Further analyses from other phase III studies in Dravet syndrome and other patient populations should be performed to confirm these findings and explore other potential factors that contribute to caregiver and investigator CGI-I ratings, such as nonseizure outcomes and tolerability,” said Arnold Gammaitoni, PharmD, vice president of medical and scientific affairs at Zogenix in San Diego, and his colleagues.

A 50% reduction in seizure frequency is conventionally considered to be the cutoff for a clinically meaningful change. To develop an evidence-based definition of clinically meaningful seizure reduction, Dr. Gammaitoni and colleagues examined data from a phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of fenfluramine HCl oral solution for the adjunctive treatment of seizures associated with Dravet syndrome. The investigators took an anchor-based approach and examined the percentage change in seizure frequency, along with caregiver and investigator CGI-I ratings.

A total of 119 patients with Dravet syndrome were enrolled and randomized in equal groups to placebo, 0.2 mg/kg per day of fenfluramine HCl, or 0.8 mg/kg per day of fenfluramine HCl. After a 2-week titration period, patients entered a 12-week maintenance period. Patients in the 0.8-mg/kg per day group had a 63.9% greater reduction in seizure frequency than controls did.

After the 14-week titration and maintenance period, caregivers and investigators rated the change in participants’ clinical status from baseline, using the CGI-I scale, on which responses range from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). The investigators considered patients with CGI-I scores of 1 or 2 (much improved) to have achieved a clinically meaningful response. A score of 3 (minimally improved) was not considered meaningful. The researchers pooled the results of the three treatment groups for this analysis. They estimated the clinically meaningful percentage change in seizure frequency using receiver operating characteristic analysis of binary CGI-I score, compared with percentage change in seizure frequency, and defined it as the cut-point for which specificity and sensitivity were equal or most similar.

Caregivers and investigators provided CGI-I assessments for 112 patients and 114 patients, respectively. The receiver operating characteristic analysis identified a 44% reduction in seizure frequency as a clinically meaningful cutoff point for caregiver and investigator assessments. Using this threshold, 75%, 46%, and 12.5% of patients in the 0.8-mg/kg per day, 0.2-mg/kg per day, and placebo groups, respectively, achieved a clinically meaningful reduction from baseline in seizure frequency in the phase III study.

“The use of external anchors is one method to define a clinically meaningful change in seizure frequency,” said Dr. Gammaitoni. “Having a defined minimum clinically important difference like this allows clinicians to assess impacts of treatments on an individual patient basis.... This is a chance for others to do similar types of analyses to confirm the findings that we have had in this first study with bigger data sets, in terms of using external anchors and data to define what a clinically meaningful change is.”

Zogenix, which is developing the fenfluramine formulation examined in this study, provided funding for this research.
 

[email protected]

SOURCE: Nabbout R et al. AES 2018, Abstract 3.202.

NEW ORLEANS – For patients with Dravet syndrome, a 44% or greater reduction in seizure frequency can be considered a clinically meaningful response, according to a study described at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. A reduction in seizure frequency of between 60% and 68% is associated with Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) ratings of “very much improved,” as assessed by caregivers and investigators.

“Further analyses from other phase III studies in Dravet syndrome and other patient populations should be performed to confirm these findings and explore other potential factors that contribute to caregiver and investigator CGI-I ratings, such as nonseizure outcomes and tolerability,” said Arnold Gammaitoni, PharmD, vice president of medical and scientific affairs at Zogenix in San Diego, and his colleagues.

A 50% reduction in seizure frequency is conventionally considered to be the cutoff for a clinically meaningful change. To develop an evidence-based definition of clinically meaningful seizure reduction, Dr. Gammaitoni and colleagues examined data from a phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of fenfluramine HCl oral solution for the adjunctive treatment of seizures associated with Dravet syndrome. The investigators took an anchor-based approach and examined the percentage change in seizure frequency, along with caregiver and investigator CGI-I ratings.

A total of 119 patients with Dravet syndrome were enrolled and randomized in equal groups to placebo, 0.2 mg/kg per day of fenfluramine HCl, or 0.8 mg/kg per day of fenfluramine HCl. After a 2-week titration period, patients entered a 12-week maintenance period. Patients in the 0.8-mg/kg per day group had a 63.9% greater reduction in seizure frequency than controls did.

After the 14-week titration and maintenance period, caregivers and investigators rated the change in participants’ clinical status from baseline, using the CGI-I scale, on which responses range from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). The investigators considered patients with CGI-I scores of 1 or 2 (much improved) to have achieved a clinically meaningful response. A score of 3 (minimally improved) was not considered meaningful. The researchers pooled the results of the three treatment groups for this analysis. They estimated the clinically meaningful percentage change in seizure frequency using receiver operating characteristic analysis of binary CGI-I score, compared with percentage change in seizure frequency, and defined it as the cut-point for which specificity and sensitivity were equal or most similar.

Caregivers and investigators provided CGI-I assessments for 112 patients and 114 patients, respectively. The receiver operating characteristic analysis identified a 44% reduction in seizure frequency as a clinically meaningful cutoff point for caregiver and investigator assessments. Using this threshold, 75%, 46%, and 12.5% of patients in the 0.8-mg/kg per day, 0.2-mg/kg per day, and placebo groups, respectively, achieved a clinically meaningful reduction from baseline in seizure frequency in the phase III study.

“The use of external anchors is one method to define a clinically meaningful change in seizure frequency,” said Dr. Gammaitoni. “Having a defined minimum clinically important difference like this allows clinicians to assess impacts of treatments on an individual patient basis.... This is a chance for others to do similar types of analyses to confirm the findings that we have had in this first study with bigger data sets, in terms of using external anchors and data to define what a clinically meaningful change is.”

Zogenix, which is developing the fenfluramine formulation examined in this study, provided funding for this research.
 

[email protected]

SOURCE: Nabbout R et al. AES 2018, Abstract 3.202.

NEW ORLEANS – For patients with Dravet syndrome, a 44% or greater reduction in seizure frequency can be considered a clinically meaningful response, according to a study described at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. A reduction in seizure frequency of between 60% and 68% is associated with Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) ratings of “very much improved,” as assessed by caregivers and investigators.

“Further analyses from other phase III studies in Dravet syndrome and other patient populations should be performed to confirm these findings and explore other potential factors that contribute to caregiver and investigator CGI-I ratings, such as nonseizure outcomes and tolerability,” said Arnold Gammaitoni, PharmD, vice president of medical and scientific affairs at Zogenix in San Diego, and his colleagues.

A 50% reduction in seizure frequency is conventionally considered to be the cutoff for a clinically meaningful change. To develop an evidence-based definition of clinically meaningful seizure reduction, Dr. Gammaitoni and colleagues examined data from a phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of fenfluramine HCl oral solution for the adjunctive treatment of seizures associated with Dravet syndrome. The investigators took an anchor-based approach and examined the percentage change in seizure frequency, along with caregiver and investigator CGI-I ratings.

A total of 119 patients with Dravet syndrome were enrolled and randomized in equal groups to placebo, 0.2 mg/kg per day of fenfluramine HCl, or 0.8 mg/kg per day of fenfluramine HCl. After a 2-week titration period, patients entered a 12-week maintenance period. Patients in the 0.8-mg/kg per day group had a 63.9% greater reduction in seizure frequency than controls did.

After the 14-week titration and maintenance period, caregivers and investigators rated the change in participants’ clinical status from baseline, using the CGI-I scale, on which responses range from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse). The investigators considered patients with CGI-I scores of 1 or 2 (much improved) to have achieved a clinically meaningful response. A score of 3 (minimally improved) was not considered meaningful. The researchers pooled the results of the three treatment groups for this analysis. They estimated the clinically meaningful percentage change in seizure frequency using receiver operating characteristic analysis of binary CGI-I score, compared with percentage change in seizure frequency, and defined it as the cut-point for which specificity and sensitivity were equal or most similar.

Caregivers and investigators provided CGI-I assessments for 112 patients and 114 patients, respectively. The receiver operating characteristic analysis identified a 44% reduction in seizure frequency as a clinically meaningful cutoff point for caregiver and investigator assessments. Using this threshold, 75%, 46%, and 12.5% of patients in the 0.8-mg/kg per day, 0.2-mg/kg per day, and placebo groups, respectively, achieved a clinically meaningful reduction from baseline in seizure frequency in the phase III study.

“The use of external anchors is one method to define a clinically meaningful change in seizure frequency,” said Dr. Gammaitoni. “Having a defined minimum clinically important difference like this allows clinicians to assess impacts of treatments on an individual patient basis.... This is a chance for others to do similar types of analyses to confirm the findings that we have had in this first study with bigger data sets, in terms of using external anchors and data to define what a clinically meaningful change is.”

Zogenix, which is developing the fenfluramine formulation examined in this study, provided funding for this research.
 

[email protected]

SOURCE: Nabbout R et al. AES 2018, Abstract 3.202.

NEW ORLEANS – The newer antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and the established AEDs have similar tolerability, according to an analysis presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. Approximately one-third of patients with epilepsy discontinue their AEDs because of adverse drug reactions, according to the researchers. An increasing number of concomitant AEDs is associated with decreasing tolerability.

Previous research by Patrick Kwan, MBBChir, PhD, chair of neurology at the University of Melbourne and his colleagues indicated that the introduction of AEDs with new mechanisms of action in the past two decades has not changed seizure outcome overall in newly diagnosed epilepsy. Researchers had not studied the long-term tolerability of AEDs, however.

Dr. Kwan, Zhibin Chen, PhD, a biostatistician at the University of Melbourne, and their colleagues examined AED-induced adverse drug reactions over a 30-year period. They analyzed data for adults who were newly treated with AEDs at the epilepsy unit of the Western Infirmary in Glasgow during July 1, 1982–Oct. 31, 2012. All patients were followed prospectively until April 30, 2016, or death. The researchers systematically reviewed patient-reported adverse drug reactions and categorized them with the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities. They defined adverse reactions that resulted in AED discontinuation as intolerable.

The investigators included 1,527 patients in their analysis. Approximately 56% of the sample was male, and the median age was 37 years. Participants tried a total of 2,766 AED regimens, including 2,028 (73%) as monotherapy and 738 (27%) as combination therapy. Among the monotherapies, 927 (46%) were established AEDs, and 1,101 (54%) were newer AEDs.

In all, 675 (44%) patients reported adverse drug reactions. These reports included 391 (26%) patients with nervous system disorders (e.g., tremor, sedation, and headaches), 272 (18%) with general disorders (e.g., fatigue, ataxia, and irritability), and 136 (9%) with psychiatric disorders (e.g., aggression, depression, and mood swings). A total of 498 (33%) patients had at least one intolerable adverse drug reaction.

The established and newer AEDs, when taken as monotherapy, had similar rates of intolerable adverse drug reactions (odds ratio, 1.09).The crude rate of intolerable adverse drug reactions appeared to increase for each additional AED regimen tried. Multivariable analysis indicated that women were more likely to report intolerable adverse drug reactions than men.

Compared with patients taking monotherapy, patients taking two AEDs had 1.67 times the risk of developing an intolerable adverse drug reaction, after data adjustments for number of previous AED regimens tried, previous intolerable adverse drug reaction, age, sex, pretreatment psychiatric comorbidity, and epilepsy type. The odds increased further in patients on three AEDs (OR, 2.38) and four AEDs (OR, 5.24). Patients who had intolerable adverse drug reactions to previous AED regimens had much greater odds of experiencing a further event (OR, 22.7).

After considering all the above factors, the researchers found that the odds of intolerable adverse drug reactions decreased for each additional AED regimen. When analyzing the 642 patients who took more than one AED regimen, they found that those who failed the first AED because of adverse drug reactions were more likely to develop intolerable adverse drug reactions to subsequent regimens (OR, 5.09). The odds of drug withdrawal because of adverse drug reaction increased 12-fold for each additional previous intolerable adverse drug reaction (OR, 13.3).

The investigators received no funding for this study.
 

This article was updated 12/4/18.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Alsfouk B et al. AES 2018, Abstract 2.275.

NEW ORLEANS – The newer antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and the established AEDs have similar tolerability, according to an analysis presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. Approximately one-third of patients with epilepsy discontinue their AEDs because of adverse drug reactions, according to the researchers. An increasing number of concomitant AEDs is associated with decreasing tolerability.

Previous research by Patrick Kwan, MBBChir, PhD, chair of neurology at the University of Melbourne and his colleagues indicated that the introduction of AEDs with new mechanisms of action in the past two decades has not changed seizure outcome overall in newly diagnosed epilepsy. Researchers had not studied the long-term tolerability of AEDs, however.

Dr. Kwan, Zhibin Chen, PhD, a biostatistician at the University of Melbourne, and their colleagues examined AED-induced adverse drug reactions over a 30-year period. They analyzed data for adults who were newly treated with AEDs at the epilepsy unit of the Western Infirmary in Glasgow during July 1, 1982–Oct. 31, 2012. All patients were followed prospectively until April 30, 2016, or death. The researchers systematically reviewed patient-reported adverse drug reactions and categorized them with the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities. They defined adverse reactions that resulted in AED discontinuation as intolerable.

The investigators included 1,527 patients in their analysis. Approximately 56% of the sample was male, and the median age was 37 years. Participants tried a total of 2,766 AED regimens, including 2,028 (73%) as monotherapy and 738 (27%) as combination therapy. Among the monotherapies, 927 (46%) were established AEDs, and 1,101 (54%) were newer AEDs.

In all, 675 (44%) patients reported adverse drug reactions. These reports included 391 (26%) patients with nervous system disorders (e.g., tremor, sedation, and headaches), 272 (18%) with general disorders (e.g., fatigue, ataxia, and irritability), and 136 (9%) with psychiatric disorders (e.g., aggression, depression, and mood swings). A total of 498 (33%) patients had at least one intolerable adverse drug reaction.

The established and newer AEDs, when taken as monotherapy, had similar rates of intolerable adverse drug reactions (odds ratio, 1.09).The crude rate of intolerable adverse drug reactions appeared to increase for each additional AED regimen tried. Multivariable analysis indicated that women were more likely to report intolerable adverse drug reactions than men.

Compared with patients taking monotherapy, patients taking two AEDs had 1.67 times the risk of developing an intolerable adverse drug reaction, after data adjustments for number of previous AED regimens tried, previous intolerable adverse drug reaction, age, sex, pretreatment psychiatric comorbidity, and epilepsy type. The odds increased further in patients on three AEDs (OR, 2.38) and four AEDs (OR, 5.24). Patients who had intolerable adverse drug reactions to previous AED regimens had much greater odds of experiencing a further event (OR, 22.7).

After considering all the above factors, the researchers found that the odds of intolerable adverse drug reactions decreased for each additional AED regimen. When analyzing the 642 patients who took more than one AED regimen, they found that those who failed the first AED because of adverse drug reactions were more likely to develop intolerable adverse drug reactions to subsequent regimens (OR, 5.09). The odds of drug withdrawal because of adverse drug reaction increased 12-fold for each additional previous intolerable adverse drug reaction (OR, 13.3).

The investigators received no funding for this study.
 

This article was updated 12/4/18.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Alsfouk B et al. AES 2018, Abstract 2.275.

NEW ORLEANS – The newer antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and the established AEDs have similar tolerability, according to an analysis presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. Approximately one-third of patients with epilepsy discontinue their AEDs because of adverse drug reactions, according to the researchers. An increasing number of concomitant AEDs is associated with decreasing tolerability.

Previous research by Patrick Kwan, MBBChir, PhD, chair of neurology at the University of Melbourne and his colleagues indicated that the introduction of AEDs with new mechanisms of action in the past two decades has not changed seizure outcome overall in newly diagnosed epilepsy. Researchers had not studied the long-term tolerability of AEDs, however.

Dr. Kwan, Zhibin Chen, PhD, a biostatistician at the University of Melbourne, and their colleagues examined AED-induced adverse drug reactions over a 30-year period. They analyzed data for adults who were newly treated with AEDs at the epilepsy unit of the Western Infirmary in Glasgow during July 1, 1982–Oct. 31, 2012. All patients were followed prospectively until April 30, 2016, or death. The researchers systematically reviewed patient-reported adverse drug reactions and categorized them with the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities. They defined adverse reactions that resulted in AED discontinuation as intolerable.

The investigators included 1,527 patients in their analysis. Approximately 56% of the sample was male, and the median age was 37 years. Participants tried a total of 2,766 AED regimens, including 2,028 (73%) as monotherapy and 738 (27%) as combination therapy. Among the monotherapies, 927 (46%) were established AEDs, and 1,101 (54%) were newer AEDs.

In all, 675 (44%) patients reported adverse drug reactions. These reports included 391 (26%) patients with nervous system disorders (e.g., tremor, sedation, and headaches), 272 (18%) with general disorders (e.g., fatigue, ataxia, and irritability), and 136 (9%) with psychiatric disorders (e.g., aggression, depression, and mood swings). A total of 498 (33%) patients had at least one intolerable adverse drug reaction.

The established and newer AEDs, when taken as monotherapy, had similar rates of intolerable adverse drug reactions (odds ratio, 1.09).The crude rate of intolerable adverse drug reactions appeared to increase for each additional AED regimen tried. Multivariable analysis indicated that women were more likely to report intolerable adverse drug reactions than men.

Compared with patients taking monotherapy, patients taking two AEDs had 1.67 times the risk of developing an intolerable adverse drug reaction, after data adjustments for number of previous AED regimens tried, previous intolerable adverse drug reaction, age, sex, pretreatment psychiatric comorbidity, and epilepsy type. The odds increased further in patients on three AEDs (OR, 2.38) and four AEDs (OR, 5.24). Patients who had intolerable adverse drug reactions to previous AED regimens had much greater odds of experiencing a further event (OR, 22.7).

After considering all the above factors, the researchers found that the odds of intolerable adverse drug reactions decreased for each additional AED regimen. When analyzing the 642 patients who took more than one AED regimen, they found that those who failed the first AED because of adverse drug reactions were more likely to develop intolerable adverse drug reactions to subsequent regimens (OR, 5.09). The odds of drug withdrawal because of adverse drug reaction increased 12-fold for each additional previous intolerable adverse drug reaction (OR, 13.3).

The investigators received no funding for this study.
 

This article was updated 12/4/18.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Alsfouk B et al. AES 2018, Abstract 2.275.

NEW ORLEANS – Women with epilepsy may have greater rates of infertility and impaired fecundity, compared with the general population, based on a retrospective study presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society.

Data recorded in the 2010-2014 Epilepsy Birth Control Registry indicates a 9.2% infertility rate and a 22.5% impaired fecundity rate among American women with epilepsy. Both rates are higher than the general population infertility rate of 6.0% and the 12.1% rate of impaired fecundity cited by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

However, differences between the study of women with epilepsy and the study of the general population may limit the validity of this comparison, said Devon B. MacEachern, clinical and research coordinator at Neuroendocrine Associates in Wellesley Hills, Mass.

It is likewise uncertain whether use of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) affects women’s fertility or fecundity.

The Epilepsy Birth Control Registry collected data from an Internet-based survey of 1,144 community-dwelling women with epilepsy aged 18-47 years. Participants provided information about demographics, epilepsy, AEDs, reproduction, and contraception.

The researchers focused on rates of infertility, impaired fecundity, and live birth or unaborted pregnancy among 978 American women, and additionally examined whether these outcomes were related to AED use.

Infertility was defined as the percentage of participants who had unprotected sex but did not become pregnant by 1 year. Impaired fecundity was the percentage of participants who were infertile or did not carry a pregnancy to live birth. The study excluded from the impaired fecundity analysis the 41 respondents whose only outcomes were induced abortions. The 18% of pregnancies that terminated as induced abortions were excluded from the live birth rate analysis.

In all, 373 registry participants had 724 pregnancies and 422 births between 1981 and 2013. The women had an average of 2.15 pregnancies at a mean age of 24.9 years (range, 13-44 years). In addition, 38 women (9.2%) tried to conceive, but were infertile. Of 306 women with a first pregnancy, 222 (72.5%) had a live birth. Among 292 women with two pregnancies, 260 (89.0%) had at least one live birth, and 180 (61.6%) had two live births.

Of the 373 women, 84 (22.5%) with pregnancies had impaired fecundity. The risk of impaired fecundity tended to be higher among women on AED polytherapy than among women on no AED (risk ratio, 1.74).

The ratio of live births to pregnancy (71.0%) was similar among women on no AEDs (71.3%), those on AED monotherapy (71.8%), and those on polytherapy (69.7%). The live birth rate was 67.5% for women taking enzyme-inducing AEDs, 89.1% for women taking glucuronidated AEDs, 72.8% for women taking nonenzyme-inducing AEDs, 63.3% for women taking enzyme-inhibiting AEDs, and 69.7% for women on polytherapy. Lamotrigine use was associated with the highest ratio of live births to pregnancies at 89.1%; valproate use was associated with the lowest ratio of live births to pregnancies at 63.3%.

The investigation was funded by the Epilepsy Foundation and Lundbeck.

[email protected]

SOURCE: MacEachern DB et al. AES 2018, Abstract 1.426.

NEW ORLEANS – Women with epilepsy may have greater rates of infertility and impaired fecundity, compared with the general population, based on a retrospective study presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society.

Data recorded in the 2010-2014 Epilepsy Birth Control Registry indicates a 9.2% infertility rate and a 22.5% impaired fecundity rate among American women with epilepsy. Both rates are higher than the general population infertility rate of 6.0% and the 12.1% rate of impaired fecundity cited by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

However, differences between the study of women with epilepsy and the study of the general population may limit the validity of this comparison, said Devon B. MacEachern, clinical and research coordinator at Neuroendocrine Associates in Wellesley Hills, Mass.

It is likewise uncertain whether use of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) affects women’s fertility or fecundity.

The Epilepsy Birth Control Registry collected data from an Internet-based survey of 1,144 community-dwelling women with epilepsy aged 18-47 years. Participants provided information about demographics, epilepsy, AEDs, reproduction, and contraception.

The researchers focused on rates of infertility, impaired fecundity, and live birth or unaborted pregnancy among 978 American women, and additionally examined whether these outcomes were related to AED use.

Infertility was defined as the percentage of participants who had unprotected sex but did not become pregnant by 1 year. Impaired fecundity was the percentage of participants who were infertile or did not carry a pregnancy to live birth. The study excluded from the impaired fecundity analysis the 41 respondents whose only outcomes were induced abortions. The 18% of pregnancies that terminated as induced abortions were excluded from the live birth rate analysis.

In all, 373 registry participants had 724 pregnancies and 422 births between 1981 and 2013. The women had an average of 2.15 pregnancies at a mean age of 24.9 years (range, 13-44 years). In addition, 38 women (9.2%) tried to conceive, but were infertile. Of 306 women with a first pregnancy, 222 (72.5%) had a live birth. Among 292 women with two pregnancies, 260 (89.0%) had at least one live birth, and 180 (61.6%) had two live births.

Of the 373 women, 84 (22.5%) with pregnancies had impaired fecundity. The risk of impaired fecundity tended to be higher among women on AED polytherapy than among women on no AED (risk ratio, 1.74).

The ratio of live births to pregnancy (71.0%) was similar among women on no AEDs (71.3%), those on AED monotherapy (71.8%), and those on polytherapy (69.7%). The live birth rate was 67.5% for women taking enzyme-inducing AEDs, 89.1% for women taking glucuronidated AEDs, 72.8% for women taking nonenzyme-inducing AEDs, 63.3% for women taking enzyme-inhibiting AEDs, and 69.7% for women on polytherapy. Lamotrigine use was associated with the highest ratio of live births to pregnancies at 89.1%; valproate use was associated with the lowest ratio of live births to pregnancies at 63.3%.

The investigation was funded by the Epilepsy Foundation and Lundbeck.

[email protected]

SOURCE: MacEachern DB et al. AES 2018, Abstract 1.426.

NEW ORLEANS – Women with epilepsy may have greater rates of infertility and impaired fecundity, compared with the general population, based on a retrospective study presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society.

Data recorded in the 2010-2014 Epilepsy Birth Control Registry indicates a 9.2% infertility rate and a 22.5% impaired fecundity rate among American women with epilepsy. Both rates are higher than the general population infertility rate of 6.0% and the 12.1% rate of impaired fecundity cited by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

However, differences between the study of women with epilepsy and the study of the general population may limit the validity of this comparison, said Devon B. MacEachern, clinical and research coordinator at Neuroendocrine Associates in Wellesley Hills, Mass.

It is likewise uncertain whether use of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) affects women’s fertility or fecundity.

The Epilepsy Birth Control Registry collected data from an Internet-based survey of 1,144 community-dwelling women with epilepsy aged 18-47 years. Participants provided information about demographics, epilepsy, AEDs, reproduction, and contraception.

The researchers focused on rates of infertility, impaired fecundity, and live birth or unaborted pregnancy among 978 American women, and additionally examined whether these outcomes were related to AED use.

Infertility was defined as the percentage of participants who had unprotected sex but did not become pregnant by 1 year. Impaired fecundity was the percentage of participants who were infertile or did not carry a pregnancy to live birth. The study excluded from the impaired fecundity analysis the 41 respondents whose only outcomes were induced abortions. The 18% of pregnancies that terminated as induced abortions were excluded from the live birth rate analysis.

In all, 373 registry participants had 724 pregnancies and 422 births between 1981 and 2013. The women had an average of 2.15 pregnancies at a mean age of 24.9 years (range, 13-44 years). In addition, 38 women (9.2%) tried to conceive, but were infertile. Of 306 women with a first pregnancy, 222 (72.5%) had a live birth. Among 292 women with two pregnancies, 260 (89.0%) had at least one live birth, and 180 (61.6%) had two live births.

Of the 373 women, 84 (22.5%) with pregnancies had impaired fecundity. The risk of impaired fecundity tended to be higher among women on AED polytherapy than among women on no AED (risk ratio, 1.74).

The ratio of live births to pregnancy (71.0%) was similar among women on no AEDs (71.3%), those on AED monotherapy (71.8%), and those on polytherapy (69.7%). The live birth rate was 67.5% for women taking enzyme-inducing AEDs, 89.1% for women taking glucuronidated AEDs, 72.8% for women taking nonenzyme-inducing AEDs, 63.3% for women taking enzyme-inhibiting AEDs, and 69.7% for women on polytherapy. Lamotrigine use was associated with the highest ratio of live births to pregnancies at 89.1%; valproate use was associated with the lowest ratio of live births to pregnancies at 63.3%.

The investigation was funded by the Epilepsy Foundation and Lundbeck.

[email protected]

SOURCE: MacEachern DB et al. AES 2018, Abstract 1.426.

NEW ORLEANS – Among patients with psychogenic nonepileptic seizures, the risk of death is more than twice as great as among the general population, according to data presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. Patients with PNES have a mortality rate comparable to that of patients with drug-resistant epilepsy.

“This [finding] emphasizes the importance of correct diagnosis and identification of relevant pathologies in order to avoid preventable deaths in an important group of patients, where medical attention is often inappropriately directed to a dramatic but ultimately irrelevant clinical feature of the condition,” said Russell Nightscales, a first-year medical student at the University of Melbourne.*

Although PNES sometimes is mistaken for epilepsy and treated accordingly, it is a form of conversion disorder. The elevated risk of death among patients with epilepsy is understood, but few researchers have studied mortality in patients with PNES.

Mr. Nightscales and his colleagues conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients who had been admitted for a comprehensive epilepsy evaluation to one of two tertiary hospital video EEG monitoring (VEM) units in Melbourne between Jan. 1, 1995, and Dec. 31, 2015. The investigators ascertained mortality and cause of death by linking patient data to the Australian National Death Index (NDI). When a coroner’s report was available, they refined the cause of death using information from the National Coronial Information System. Each patient’s diagnosis was based on the consensus opinion of experienced epileptologists at the Comprehensive Epilepsy Meeting following a review of the clinical history, VEM data, and investigations. The researchers compared mortality in patients with PNES, epilepsy, or both conditions. They extracted clinical data through medical record review. Finally, they determined lifetime history of psychiatric disorders through review of neuropsychiatric reports.

Of 3,152 patients who underwent VEM, the investigators included 2,076 patients in their analyses. Of this population, 631 patients had PNES, 1,339 had epilepsy, and 106 had both. The standardized mortality ratio (SMR) among patients with PNES was 2.6 times greater than among the general population. Patients with PNES between ages 30 and 39 had a ninefold higher risk of death, compared with the general population. The SMR of patients with epilepsy was 3.2. The investigators found no significant difference in the rate of mortality between any of the patient groups after excluding 17 patients with epilepsy and a known brain tumor at the time of VEM, who had a malignant neoplasm of the brain listed as their primary cause of death.

Death resulted from external causes in 20% of all deaths among patients with PNES and in 53% of deaths with a known cause among patients who died below the age of 50. Suicide accounted for 24% of deaths among patients with PNES in this age group. Neoplasia and cardiorespiratory causes were responsible for 51% of deaths with a known cause across all ages and 67% of those between ages 50 and 69. Among people with epilepsy, external causes accounted for 7% of all deaths. Neoplasia and cardiorespiratory causes were observed in 42% of people with epilepsy. Epilepsy was responsible for 28% of deaths with a known cause among patients with epilepsy

The research was funded by Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council and the RMH Neuroscience Foundation.

[email protected]

SOURCE: O’Brien TJ et al. AES 2018, Abstract 1.139.

*Correction 12/4/18: An earlier version of this article misstated the name of the presenter. Russell Nightscales presented this study.

NEW ORLEANS – Among patients with psychogenic nonepileptic seizures, the risk of death is more than twice as great as among the general population, according to data presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. Patients with PNES have a mortality rate comparable to that of patients with drug-resistant epilepsy.

“This [finding] emphasizes the importance of correct diagnosis and identification of relevant pathologies in order to avoid preventable deaths in an important group of patients, where medical attention is often inappropriately directed to a dramatic but ultimately irrelevant clinical feature of the condition,” said Russell Nightscales, a first-year medical student at the University of Melbourne.*

Although PNES sometimes is mistaken for epilepsy and treated accordingly, it is a form of conversion disorder. The elevated risk of death among patients with epilepsy is understood, but few researchers have studied mortality in patients with PNES.

Mr. Nightscales and his colleagues conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients who had been admitted for a comprehensive epilepsy evaluation to one of two tertiary hospital video EEG monitoring (VEM) units in Melbourne between Jan. 1, 1995, and Dec. 31, 2015. The investigators ascertained mortality and cause of death by linking patient data to the Australian National Death Index (NDI). When a coroner’s report was available, they refined the cause of death using information from the National Coronial Information System. Each patient’s diagnosis was based on the consensus opinion of experienced epileptologists at the Comprehensive Epilepsy Meeting following a review of the clinical history, VEM data, and investigations. The researchers compared mortality in patients with PNES, epilepsy, or both conditions. They extracted clinical data through medical record review. Finally, they determined lifetime history of psychiatric disorders through review of neuropsychiatric reports.

Of 3,152 patients who underwent VEM, the investigators included 2,076 patients in their analyses. Of this population, 631 patients had PNES, 1,339 had epilepsy, and 106 had both. The standardized mortality ratio (SMR) among patients with PNES was 2.6 times greater than among the general population. Patients with PNES between ages 30 and 39 had a ninefold higher risk of death, compared with the general population. The SMR of patients with epilepsy was 3.2. The investigators found no significant difference in the rate of mortality between any of the patient groups after excluding 17 patients with epilepsy and a known brain tumor at the time of VEM, who had a malignant neoplasm of the brain listed as their primary cause of death.

Death resulted from external causes in 20% of all deaths among patients with PNES and in 53% of deaths with a known cause among patients who died below the age of 50. Suicide accounted for 24% of deaths among patients with PNES in this age group. Neoplasia and cardiorespiratory causes were responsible for 51% of deaths with a known cause across all ages and 67% of those between ages 50 and 69. Among people with epilepsy, external causes accounted for 7% of all deaths. Neoplasia and cardiorespiratory causes were observed in 42% of people with epilepsy. Epilepsy was responsible for 28% of deaths with a known cause among patients with epilepsy

The research was funded by Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council and the RMH Neuroscience Foundation.

[email protected]

SOURCE: O’Brien TJ et al. AES 2018, Abstract 1.139.

*Correction 12/4/18: An earlier version of this article misstated the name of the presenter. Russell Nightscales presented this study.

NEW ORLEANS – Among patients with psychogenic nonepileptic seizures, the risk of death is more than twice as great as among the general population, according to data presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. Patients with PNES have a mortality rate comparable to that of patients with drug-resistant epilepsy.

“This [finding] emphasizes the importance of correct diagnosis and identification of relevant pathologies in order to avoid preventable deaths in an important group of patients, where medical attention is often inappropriately directed to a dramatic but ultimately irrelevant clinical feature of the condition,” said Russell Nightscales, a first-year medical student at the University of Melbourne.*

Although PNES sometimes is mistaken for epilepsy and treated accordingly, it is a form of conversion disorder. The elevated risk of death among patients with epilepsy is understood, but few researchers have studied mortality in patients with PNES.

Mr. Nightscales and his colleagues conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients who had been admitted for a comprehensive epilepsy evaluation to one of two tertiary hospital video EEG monitoring (VEM) units in Melbourne between Jan. 1, 1995, and Dec. 31, 2015. The investigators ascertained mortality and cause of death by linking patient data to the Australian National Death Index (NDI). When a coroner’s report was available, they refined the cause of death using information from the National Coronial Information System. Each patient’s diagnosis was based on the consensus opinion of experienced epileptologists at the Comprehensive Epilepsy Meeting following a review of the clinical history, VEM data, and investigations. The researchers compared mortality in patients with PNES, epilepsy, or both conditions. They extracted clinical data through medical record review. Finally, they determined lifetime history of psychiatric disorders through review of neuropsychiatric reports.

Of 3,152 patients who underwent VEM, the investigators included 2,076 patients in their analyses. Of this population, 631 patients had PNES, 1,339 had epilepsy, and 106 had both. The standardized mortality ratio (SMR) among patients with PNES was 2.6 times greater than among the general population. Patients with PNES between ages 30 and 39 had a ninefold higher risk of death, compared with the general population. The SMR of patients with epilepsy was 3.2. The investigators found no significant difference in the rate of mortality between any of the patient groups after excluding 17 patients with epilepsy and a known brain tumor at the time of VEM, who had a malignant neoplasm of the brain listed as their primary cause of death.

Death resulted from external causes in 20% of all deaths among patients with PNES and in 53% of deaths with a known cause among patients who died below the age of 50. Suicide accounted for 24% of deaths among patients with PNES in this age group. Neoplasia and cardiorespiratory causes were responsible for 51% of deaths with a known cause across all ages and 67% of those between ages 50 and 69. Among people with epilepsy, external causes accounted for 7% of all deaths. Neoplasia and cardiorespiratory causes were observed in 42% of people with epilepsy. Epilepsy was responsible for 28% of deaths with a known cause among patients with epilepsy

The research was funded by Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council and the RMH Neuroscience Foundation.

[email protected]

SOURCE: O’Brien TJ et al. AES 2018, Abstract 1.139.

*Correction 12/4/18: An earlier version of this article misstated the name of the presenter. Russell Nightscales presented this study.

NEW ORLEANS – Risk for sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) may change over time and yearly patient risk assessments are advisable, based on study results presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society.

Based on 3 years of data collected from over 12,000 people with epilepsy, 27.0% who had been at high risk (three or more generalized tonic-clonic seizures [GTCs] per year) at baseline moved out of the high-risk category. In addition, 32.5% at medium risk (one to two GTCs per year) at baseline changed categories. Finally, 7.0% in the low-risk category (no GTC seizures in the last year) at baseline moved to a higher-risk category.

“An individual’s risk [of SUDEP] is not set in stone,” said Neishay Ayub, MD, of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, who presented the data at the meeting. “Our findings support the recommendation that for people with epilepsy who have ongoing generalized tonic-clonic seizures, the goal of treatment is to reduce GTCs and thereby lower SUDEP risk.”

A 2017 practice guideline summary from the American Academy of Neurology and the American Epilepsy Society identified the presence and frequency of GTCs and absence of seizure freedom as risk factors for SUDEP. Using these measures, Dr. Ayub and colleagues sought to stratify patients according to their risk of SUDEP and monitor how risk changed over time. They collected information about more than 1.4 million seizures that occurred from December 2007 to February 2018 in 12,402 users of the electronic diary Seizure Tracker.

For each user, the researchers calculated the number of generalized seizures for each year since the initial seizure diary entry. They categorized each user as being at low, medium, or high risk of SUDEP during each year. Low risk was defined as no generalized seizures in a year. Medium risk was defined as one or two generalized seizures in a year. High risk was defined as three or more generalized seizures in a year.

“The next step would be to see if we can confirm this patient-reported data with an objective study to determine when seizures did or did not occur,” said Daniel Goldenholz, MD, PhD, also of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and senior author of the study. “For example, assessing information using new FDA [Food and Drug Administration]-approved wearable seizure tracker devices could give us a more comprehensive picture.”

The study was funded by the Harvard School of Public Health, Boston.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Ayub N et al. AES 2018, Abstract 2.158.

NEW ORLEANS – Risk for sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) may change over time and yearly patient risk assessments are advisable, based on study results presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society.

Based on 3 years of data collected from over 12,000 people with epilepsy, 27.0% who had been at high risk (three or more generalized tonic-clonic seizures [GTCs] per year) at baseline moved out of the high-risk category. In addition, 32.5% at medium risk (one to two GTCs per year) at baseline changed categories. Finally, 7.0% in the low-risk category (no GTC seizures in the last year) at baseline moved to a higher-risk category.

“An individual’s risk [of SUDEP] is not set in stone,” said Neishay Ayub, MD, of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, who presented the data at the meeting. “Our findings support the recommendation that for people with epilepsy who have ongoing generalized tonic-clonic seizures, the goal of treatment is to reduce GTCs and thereby lower SUDEP risk.”

A 2017 practice guideline summary from the American Academy of Neurology and the American Epilepsy Society identified the presence and frequency of GTCs and absence of seizure freedom as risk factors for SUDEP. Using these measures, Dr. Ayub and colleagues sought to stratify patients according to their risk of SUDEP and monitor how risk changed over time. They collected information about more than 1.4 million seizures that occurred from December 2007 to February 2018 in 12,402 users of the electronic diary Seizure Tracker.

For each user, the researchers calculated the number of generalized seizures for each year since the initial seizure diary entry. They categorized each user as being at low, medium, or high risk of SUDEP during each year. Low risk was defined as no generalized seizures in a year. Medium risk was defined as one or two generalized seizures in a year. High risk was defined as three or more generalized seizures in a year.

“The next step would be to see if we can confirm this patient-reported data with an objective study to determine when seizures did or did not occur,” said Daniel Goldenholz, MD, PhD, also of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and senior author of the study. “For example, assessing information using new FDA [Food and Drug Administration]-approved wearable seizure tracker devices could give us a more comprehensive picture.”

The study was funded by the Harvard School of Public Health, Boston.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Ayub N et al. AES 2018, Abstract 2.158.

NEW ORLEANS – Risk for sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) may change over time and yearly patient risk assessments are advisable, based on study results presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society.

Based on 3 years of data collected from over 12,000 people with epilepsy, 27.0% who had been at high risk (three or more generalized tonic-clonic seizures [GTCs] per year) at baseline moved out of the high-risk category. In addition, 32.5% at medium risk (one to two GTCs per year) at baseline changed categories. Finally, 7.0% in the low-risk category (no GTC seizures in the last year) at baseline moved to a higher-risk category.

“An individual’s risk [of SUDEP] is not set in stone,” said Neishay Ayub, MD, of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, who presented the data at the meeting. “Our findings support the recommendation that for people with epilepsy who have ongoing generalized tonic-clonic seizures, the goal of treatment is to reduce GTCs and thereby lower SUDEP risk.”

A 2017 practice guideline summary from the American Academy of Neurology and the American Epilepsy Society identified the presence and frequency of GTCs and absence of seizure freedom as risk factors for SUDEP. Using these measures, Dr. Ayub and colleagues sought to stratify patients according to their risk of SUDEP and monitor how risk changed over time. They collected information about more than 1.4 million seizures that occurred from December 2007 to February 2018 in 12,402 users of the electronic diary Seizure Tracker.

For each user, the researchers calculated the number of generalized seizures for each year since the initial seizure diary entry. They categorized each user as being at low, medium, or high risk of SUDEP during each year. Low risk was defined as no generalized seizures in a year. Medium risk was defined as one or two generalized seizures in a year. High risk was defined as three or more generalized seizures in a year.

“The next step would be to see if we can confirm this patient-reported data with an objective study to determine when seizures did or did not occur,” said Daniel Goldenholz, MD, PhD, also of Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and senior author of the study. “For example, assessing information using new FDA [Food and Drug Administration]-approved wearable seizure tracker devices could give us a more comprehensive picture.”

The study was funded by the Harvard School of Public Health, Boston.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Ayub N et al. AES 2018, Abstract 2.158.