User login
‘Remarkable’ seizure-free rates seen with adjunctive cenobamate
In addition, “high rates of seizure freedom were observed with doses of 200 mg and 400 mg,” investigators reported in the Lancet Neurology.
During a 12-week maintenance phase, 21% of patients who received cenobamate 400 mg/day and 11% who received cenobamate 200 mg/day were seizure free, compared with 1% who received placebo. “These data suggest that cenobamate might be a safe and effective treatment option in patients with uncontrolled focal (partial)-onset seizures,” the authors wrote.
On Nov. 21, 2019, the Food and Drug Administration approved cenobamate tablets, marketed as Xcopri, to treat focal-onset seizures in adults. The agency noted that hypersensitivity reactions have occurred with cenobamate in two randomized, controlled studies and that one patient died when the drug was titrated rapidly during one of the studies that has not been published yet.
Researchers think that cenobamate, a novel tetrazole alkyl carbamate derivative, reduces neuronal excitability “by enhancing the fast and slow inactivation of sodium channels and by inhibiting the persistent component of the sodium channel current,” wrote Gregory L. Krauss, MD, a professor of neurology at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, and colleagues.
The rates of seizure freedom with adjunctive cenobamate in the published trial are “a remarkable finding,” wrote Stephan Arnold, MD, an epilepsy specialist at Neurozentrum Nymphenburg in Munich, in an accompanying commentary. Twenty of 95 patients in the 400-mg/day group and 11 of 98 patients in the 200-mg/day group “had no seizures during the 12-week maintenance phase, whereas only 1 patient (1%) of the placebo group remained free of seizures during this period,” Dr. Arnold wrote. “To my knowledge, a seizure freedom rate of 20% or higher has not yet been reported in a placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of anticonvulsive drugs.”
Still, clinical trials in general are limited by their inclusion and exclusion criteria, relatively short maintenance phases, and the need to keep the dosage of concomitant drugs unchanged during the study, Dr. Arnold noted. “Thus, future findings under real-life conditions will reveal the clinical relevance of cenobamate.”
Hypersensitivity reactions led to protocol adjustments
During the trial, the investigators amended the protocol to lower the starting dose of cenobamate and slow the rate of up-titration to address a risk of allergic drug reactions. “Three hypersensitivity reactions, characterized as rash with involvement of at least one other body system, were reported in three patients” who were assigned to receive cenobamate 200 mg/day, the authors wrote. One case of pruritic rash accompanied by pyrexia occurred on day 10 during the initial faster titration protocol. In another case, “a rash and facial swelling occurred on day 57 in a patient who underwent the amended titration protocol.” These two patients discontinued treatment, and the rashes resolved.
“The third hypersensitivity reaction was a serious case of drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms that occurred starting on day 24 of treatment in a patient randomly assigned to receive 200 mg/day of cenobamate during the faster initial titration protocol,” the authors wrote. “Treatment was discontinued and the patient was treated with corticosteroids and recovered within 2 months.”
The most common treatment-emergent adverse events included somnolence, dizziness, and fatigue. Most events were mild or moderate. The rate of titration and an inability to adjust the dose of concomitant medications may have contributed to the rate of adverse events, the researchers noted. Treatment-emergent adverse events were most frequent in the 400-mg/day group and led to treatment discontinuation in 20% of patients in this group. An ongoing phase 3 study is assessing a lower starting dose and slower titration rate.
A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial
The 18-week, double-blind, randomized trial published in Lancet Neurology is one of two phase 2 clinical trials of cenobamate. The other phase 2 study, which lasted 12 weeks, is pending publication. For the 18-week study, researchers at 107 centers in 16 countries enrolled more than 430 adults aged 18-70 years with uncontrolled focal epilepsy. Patients were taking one to three concomitant antiepileptic drugs at stable doses for at least 4 weeks before screening. Patients completed an 8-week baseline assessment, followed by a 6-week titration phase and a 12-week maintenance phase.
“During the 8-week baseline assessment, patients had to have eight or more focal aware (simple partial) seizures with a motor component, focal impaired awareness (complex partial) seizures, or focal to bilateral tonic-clonic (secondarily generalized) seizures, with a seizure-free interval of less than 25 days,” Dr. Krauss and colleagues wrote. In addition, participants had to have at least three of these seizures during the first 4 weeks of the baseline assessment and at least three during the last 4 weeks.
The investigators excluded patients who were taking diazepam, phenytoin, or phenobarbital within 1 month of screening because of a potential drug-drug interaction with cenobamate. Other exclusion criteria included clinically significant psychiatric illness and status epilepticus within 3 months of screening.
The researchers assigned patients 1:1:1:1 to receive cenobamate 100 mg/day, cenobamate 200 mg/day, cenobamate 400 mg/day, or placebo. Percentage change from baseline in focal seizure frequency averaged over 28 days during the 18-week treatment period was the primary efficacy outcome for the FDA. The responder rate (the percentage of patients with at least a 50% reduction from baseline in focal seizure frequency) during the 12-week maintenance phase was the primary efficacy outcome for the European Medicines Agency.
The investigators screened 533 patients and assigned 437 to treatment groups. The modified intention-to-treat population included 434 patients, the modified intention-to-treat maintenance-phase population included 397 patients, and the safety population included 437 patients. The most frequently used concomitant medications were levetiracetam (43%), lamotrigine (32%), and carbamazepine (28%).
The median percentage change from baseline in focal seizure frequency per 28 days during treatment was –24% for the placebo group and –35.5% for the cenobamate 100-mg group. The cenobamate 200 mg group and the cenobamate 400-mg/day group each had a change of –55%.
Responder rates during the maintenance phase were 25% for the placebo group, 40% for the 100-mg group, 56% for the 200-mg group, and 64% for the 400-mg group.
The implications of seizure freedom
The authors acknowledged that it is “difficult to interpret seizure freedom in clinical trials given the constraints of the study designs ... which do not reflect real-life practice. Nonetheless, seizure freedom is of great clinical significance to patient quality of life and the rates reported in this study are notable relative to all other pivotal studies of antiepileptic drug treatment in uncontrolled focal seizures over the past 25 years.”
Rates of seizure freedom represent a crucial outcome measure, Dr. Arnold wrote in his commentary.
“For individual patients, it is not a seizure reduction of 50% or even higher that counts, since this effect will not allow them to drive a car or to work under circumstances bearing increased health risks,” he wrote. “Even when seizure are infrequent, patients nevertheless face the risks of falls, fractures, drowning, and sudden unexpected death in epilepsy. It is complete seizure control that gives rise for hope of an independent lifestyle.”
The study was funded by SK Life Science, the developer of cenobamate. One of the study authors is an employee of SK Life Science. Dr. Krauss is a consultant or advisor for Eisai, Otsuka, and Shire and has received research support from Biogen, SK Life Science, and UCB. Dr. Arnold had no competing interests.
SOURCE: Krauss GL et al. Lancet Neurol. 2019 Nov 13. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30399-0.
In addition, “high rates of seizure freedom were observed with doses of 200 mg and 400 mg,” investigators reported in the Lancet Neurology.
During a 12-week maintenance phase, 21% of patients who received cenobamate 400 mg/day and 11% who received cenobamate 200 mg/day were seizure free, compared with 1% who received placebo. “These data suggest that cenobamate might be a safe and effective treatment option in patients with uncontrolled focal (partial)-onset seizures,” the authors wrote.
On Nov. 21, 2019, the Food and Drug Administration approved cenobamate tablets, marketed as Xcopri, to treat focal-onset seizures in adults. The agency noted that hypersensitivity reactions have occurred with cenobamate in two randomized, controlled studies and that one patient died when the drug was titrated rapidly during one of the studies that has not been published yet.
Researchers think that cenobamate, a novel tetrazole alkyl carbamate derivative, reduces neuronal excitability “by enhancing the fast and slow inactivation of sodium channels and by inhibiting the persistent component of the sodium channel current,” wrote Gregory L. Krauss, MD, a professor of neurology at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, and colleagues.
The rates of seizure freedom with adjunctive cenobamate in the published trial are “a remarkable finding,” wrote Stephan Arnold, MD, an epilepsy specialist at Neurozentrum Nymphenburg in Munich, in an accompanying commentary. Twenty of 95 patients in the 400-mg/day group and 11 of 98 patients in the 200-mg/day group “had no seizures during the 12-week maintenance phase, whereas only 1 patient (1%) of the placebo group remained free of seizures during this period,” Dr. Arnold wrote. “To my knowledge, a seizure freedom rate of 20% or higher has not yet been reported in a placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of anticonvulsive drugs.”
Still, clinical trials in general are limited by their inclusion and exclusion criteria, relatively short maintenance phases, and the need to keep the dosage of concomitant drugs unchanged during the study, Dr. Arnold noted. “Thus, future findings under real-life conditions will reveal the clinical relevance of cenobamate.”
Hypersensitivity reactions led to protocol adjustments
During the trial, the investigators amended the protocol to lower the starting dose of cenobamate and slow the rate of up-titration to address a risk of allergic drug reactions. “Three hypersensitivity reactions, characterized as rash with involvement of at least one other body system, were reported in three patients” who were assigned to receive cenobamate 200 mg/day, the authors wrote. One case of pruritic rash accompanied by pyrexia occurred on day 10 during the initial faster titration protocol. In another case, “a rash and facial swelling occurred on day 57 in a patient who underwent the amended titration protocol.” These two patients discontinued treatment, and the rashes resolved.
“The third hypersensitivity reaction was a serious case of drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms that occurred starting on day 24 of treatment in a patient randomly assigned to receive 200 mg/day of cenobamate during the faster initial titration protocol,” the authors wrote. “Treatment was discontinued and the patient was treated with corticosteroids and recovered within 2 months.”
The most common treatment-emergent adverse events included somnolence, dizziness, and fatigue. Most events were mild or moderate. The rate of titration and an inability to adjust the dose of concomitant medications may have contributed to the rate of adverse events, the researchers noted. Treatment-emergent adverse events were most frequent in the 400-mg/day group and led to treatment discontinuation in 20% of patients in this group. An ongoing phase 3 study is assessing a lower starting dose and slower titration rate.
A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial
The 18-week, double-blind, randomized trial published in Lancet Neurology is one of two phase 2 clinical trials of cenobamate. The other phase 2 study, which lasted 12 weeks, is pending publication. For the 18-week study, researchers at 107 centers in 16 countries enrolled more than 430 adults aged 18-70 years with uncontrolled focal epilepsy. Patients were taking one to three concomitant antiepileptic drugs at stable doses for at least 4 weeks before screening. Patients completed an 8-week baseline assessment, followed by a 6-week titration phase and a 12-week maintenance phase.
“During the 8-week baseline assessment, patients had to have eight or more focal aware (simple partial) seizures with a motor component, focal impaired awareness (complex partial) seizures, or focal to bilateral tonic-clonic (secondarily generalized) seizures, with a seizure-free interval of less than 25 days,” Dr. Krauss and colleagues wrote. In addition, participants had to have at least three of these seizures during the first 4 weeks of the baseline assessment and at least three during the last 4 weeks.
The investigators excluded patients who were taking diazepam, phenytoin, or phenobarbital within 1 month of screening because of a potential drug-drug interaction with cenobamate. Other exclusion criteria included clinically significant psychiatric illness and status epilepticus within 3 months of screening.
The researchers assigned patients 1:1:1:1 to receive cenobamate 100 mg/day, cenobamate 200 mg/day, cenobamate 400 mg/day, or placebo. Percentage change from baseline in focal seizure frequency averaged over 28 days during the 18-week treatment period was the primary efficacy outcome for the FDA. The responder rate (the percentage of patients with at least a 50% reduction from baseline in focal seizure frequency) during the 12-week maintenance phase was the primary efficacy outcome for the European Medicines Agency.
The investigators screened 533 patients and assigned 437 to treatment groups. The modified intention-to-treat population included 434 patients, the modified intention-to-treat maintenance-phase population included 397 patients, and the safety population included 437 patients. The most frequently used concomitant medications were levetiracetam (43%), lamotrigine (32%), and carbamazepine (28%).
The median percentage change from baseline in focal seizure frequency per 28 days during treatment was –24% for the placebo group and –35.5% for the cenobamate 100-mg group. The cenobamate 200 mg group and the cenobamate 400-mg/day group each had a change of –55%.
Responder rates during the maintenance phase were 25% for the placebo group, 40% for the 100-mg group, 56% for the 200-mg group, and 64% for the 400-mg group.
The implications of seizure freedom
The authors acknowledged that it is “difficult to interpret seizure freedom in clinical trials given the constraints of the study designs ... which do not reflect real-life practice. Nonetheless, seizure freedom is of great clinical significance to patient quality of life and the rates reported in this study are notable relative to all other pivotal studies of antiepileptic drug treatment in uncontrolled focal seizures over the past 25 years.”
Rates of seizure freedom represent a crucial outcome measure, Dr. Arnold wrote in his commentary.
“For individual patients, it is not a seizure reduction of 50% or even higher that counts, since this effect will not allow them to drive a car or to work under circumstances bearing increased health risks,” he wrote. “Even when seizure are infrequent, patients nevertheless face the risks of falls, fractures, drowning, and sudden unexpected death in epilepsy. It is complete seizure control that gives rise for hope of an independent lifestyle.”
The study was funded by SK Life Science, the developer of cenobamate. One of the study authors is an employee of SK Life Science. Dr. Krauss is a consultant or advisor for Eisai, Otsuka, and Shire and has received research support from Biogen, SK Life Science, and UCB. Dr. Arnold had no competing interests.
SOURCE: Krauss GL et al. Lancet Neurol. 2019 Nov 13. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30399-0.
In addition, “high rates of seizure freedom were observed with doses of 200 mg and 400 mg,” investigators reported in the Lancet Neurology.
During a 12-week maintenance phase, 21% of patients who received cenobamate 400 mg/day and 11% who received cenobamate 200 mg/day were seizure free, compared with 1% who received placebo. “These data suggest that cenobamate might be a safe and effective treatment option in patients with uncontrolled focal (partial)-onset seizures,” the authors wrote.
On Nov. 21, 2019, the Food and Drug Administration approved cenobamate tablets, marketed as Xcopri, to treat focal-onset seizures in adults. The agency noted that hypersensitivity reactions have occurred with cenobamate in two randomized, controlled studies and that one patient died when the drug was titrated rapidly during one of the studies that has not been published yet.
Researchers think that cenobamate, a novel tetrazole alkyl carbamate derivative, reduces neuronal excitability “by enhancing the fast and slow inactivation of sodium channels and by inhibiting the persistent component of the sodium channel current,” wrote Gregory L. Krauss, MD, a professor of neurology at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, and colleagues.
The rates of seizure freedom with adjunctive cenobamate in the published trial are “a remarkable finding,” wrote Stephan Arnold, MD, an epilepsy specialist at Neurozentrum Nymphenburg in Munich, in an accompanying commentary. Twenty of 95 patients in the 400-mg/day group and 11 of 98 patients in the 200-mg/day group “had no seizures during the 12-week maintenance phase, whereas only 1 patient (1%) of the placebo group remained free of seizures during this period,” Dr. Arnold wrote. “To my knowledge, a seizure freedom rate of 20% or higher has not yet been reported in a placebo-controlled, double-blind trial of anticonvulsive drugs.”
Still, clinical trials in general are limited by their inclusion and exclusion criteria, relatively short maintenance phases, and the need to keep the dosage of concomitant drugs unchanged during the study, Dr. Arnold noted. “Thus, future findings under real-life conditions will reveal the clinical relevance of cenobamate.”
Hypersensitivity reactions led to protocol adjustments
During the trial, the investigators amended the protocol to lower the starting dose of cenobamate and slow the rate of up-titration to address a risk of allergic drug reactions. “Three hypersensitivity reactions, characterized as rash with involvement of at least one other body system, were reported in three patients” who were assigned to receive cenobamate 200 mg/day, the authors wrote. One case of pruritic rash accompanied by pyrexia occurred on day 10 during the initial faster titration protocol. In another case, “a rash and facial swelling occurred on day 57 in a patient who underwent the amended titration protocol.” These two patients discontinued treatment, and the rashes resolved.
“The third hypersensitivity reaction was a serious case of drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms that occurred starting on day 24 of treatment in a patient randomly assigned to receive 200 mg/day of cenobamate during the faster initial titration protocol,” the authors wrote. “Treatment was discontinued and the patient was treated with corticosteroids and recovered within 2 months.”
The most common treatment-emergent adverse events included somnolence, dizziness, and fatigue. Most events were mild or moderate. The rate of titration and an inability to adjust the dose of concomitant medications may have contributed to the rate of adverse events, the researchers noted. Treatment-emergent adverse events were most frequent in the 400-mg/day group and led to treatment discontinuation in 20% of patients in this group. An ongoing phase 3 study is assessing a lower starting dose and slower titration rate.
A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial
The 18-week, double-blind, randomized trial published in Lancet Neurology is one of two phase 2 clinical trials of cenobamate. The other phase 2 study, which lasted 12 weeks, is pending publication. For the 18-week study, researchers at 107 centers in 16 countries enrolled more than 430 adults aged 18-70 years with uncontrolled focal epilepsy. Patients were taking one to three concomitant antiepileptic drugs at stable doses for at least 4 weeks before screening. Patients completed an 8-week baseline assessment, followed by a 6-week titration phase and a 12-week maintenance phase.
“During the 8-week baseline assessment, patients had to have eight or more focal aware (simple partial) seizures with a motor component, focal impaired awareness (complex partial) seizures, or focal to bilateral tonic-clonic (secondarily generalized) seizures, with a seizure-free interval of less than 25 days,” Dr. Krauss and colleagues wrote. In addition, participants had to have at least three of these seizures during the first 4 weeks of the baseline assessment and at least three during the last 4 weeks.
The investigators excluded patients who were taking diazepam, phenytoin, or phenobarbital within 1 month of screening because of a potential drug-drug interaction with cenobamate. Other exclusion criteria included clinically significant psychiatric illness and status epilepticus within 3 months of screening.
The researchers assigned patients 1:1:1:1 to receive cenobamate 100 mg/day, cenobamate 200 mg/day, cenobamate 400 mg/day, or placebo. Percentage change from baseline in focal seizure frequency averaged over 28 days during the 18-week treatment period was the primary efficacy outcome for the FDA. The responder rate (the percentage of patients with at least a 50% reduction from baseline in focal seizure frequency) during the 12-week maintenance phase was the primary efficacy outcome for the European Medicines Agency.
The investigators screened 533 patients and assigned 437 to treatment groups. The modified intention-to-treat population included 434 patients, the modified intention-to-treat maintenance-phase population included 397 patients, and the safety population included 437 patients. The most frequently used concomitant medications were levetiracetam (43%), lamotrigine (32%), and carbamazepine (28%).
The median percentage change from baseline in focal seizure frequency per 28 days during treatment was –24% for the placebo group and –35.5% for the cenobamate 100-mg group. The cenobamate 200 mg group and the cenobamate 400-mg/day group each had a change of –55%.
Responder rates during the maintenance phase were 25% for the placebo group, 40% for the 100-mg group, 56% for the 200-mg group, and 64% for the 400-mg group.
The implications of seizure freedom
The authors acknowledged that it is “difficult to interpret seizure freedom in clinical trials given the constraints of the study designs ... which do not reflect real-life practice. Nonetheless, seizure freedom is of great clinical significance to patient quality of life and the rates reported in this study are notable relative to all other pivotal studies of antiepileptic drug treatment in uncontrolled focal seizures over the past 25 years.”
Rates of seizure freedom represent a crucial outcome measure, Dr. Arnold wrote in his commentary.
“For individual patients, it is not a seizure reduction of 50% or even higher that counts, since this effect will not allow them to drive a car or to work under circumstances bearing increased health risks,” he wrote. “Even when seizure are infrequent, patients nevertheless face the risks of falls, fractures, drowning, and sudden unexpected death in epilepsy. It is complete seizure control that gives rise for hope of an independent lifestyle.”
The study was funded by SK Life Science, the developer of cenobamate. One of the study authors is an employee of SK Life Science. Dr. Krauss is a consultant or advisor for Eisai, Otsuka, and Shire and has received research support from Biogen, SK Life Science, and UCB. Dr. Arnold had no competing interests.
SOURCE: Krauss GL et al. Lancet Neurol. 2019 Nov 13. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(19)30399-0.
FROM LANCET NEUROLOGY
FDA okays cenobamate (Xcopri) for focal epilepsy
The Food and Drug Administration has approved cenobamate (Xcopri) for the treatment of partial-onset seizures in adult patients with epilepsy.
The approval on Nov. 21 was based on results from two randomized controlled trials that included more than 600 patients, the agency said in a press release.
Together, the trials showed that the study drug at doses of 100, 200, and 400 mg significantly reduced the percentage of seizures, compared with placebo.
The FDA notes that, although the recommended maintenance dose of the drug is 200 mg/day after titration, some patients may need to be titrated up to 400 mg/day.
“Xcopri is a new option to treat adults with partial-onset seizures, which is an often difficult-to-control condition that can have a significant impact on patient quality of life,” Billy Dunn, MD, director of the Office of Neuroscience in the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research at the FDA, said in a statement.
Adverse events
As reported by Medscape Medical News, results from one of the studies upon which this approval was based were published online last week in Lancet Neurology. The findings showed that both primary endpoints were met.
Although most treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were reported to be mild to moderate in severity, one of these participants receiving the 200 mg dose had a drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS).
The FDA noted that one patient in the other trial also died when the active drug was titrated rapidly.
In an open-label safety trial of 1,339 participants that was also reviewed by the FDA, there were no cases of DRESS when patients started cenobamate at 12.5 mg/day and the dose was adjusted every 2 weeks.
Because more patients who took the drug than those taking placebo had a shortening of the QT interval greater than 20 milliseconds, cenobamate shouldn’t be used in those with hypersensitivity to the drug “or any of the inactive ingredients in Xcopri or Familial Short QT syndrome,” the agency wrote, adding that QT shortening can be associated with ventricular fibrillation, a serious heart rhythm problem.
The FDA also noted that any patient taking an antiepileptic drug should be monitored for the emergence or worsening of depressive symptoms, suicidal thoughts or behaviors, or any other changes in mood.
The most common AEs reported in the trials were somnolence, dizziness, fatigue, and diplopia (double vision).
‘Welcome option’
“The approval of Xcopri will provide clinicians with an effective medication for our patients who are continuing to have focal [partial-onset] seizures,” Michael Sperling, MD, professor of neurology and director of the Jefferson Comprehensive Epilepsy Center, Philadelphia, and an investigator in the drug’s clinical development program, said in a press release from SK Life Science.
“It is very encouraging to see that patients receiving Xcopri saw significant reductions in frequency of seizures, with some even achieving zero seizures,” Dr. Sperling added.
“There is an urgent need to advance research and introduce new treatment options. The FDA approval of Xcopri for the treatment of partial-onset seizures is a welcome option for the epilepsy community,” Beth Lewin Dean, chief executive officer of Citizens United for Research in Epilepsy, said in the same release.
SK Life Science noted in a statement that the drug is expected to be available in the United States in the second quarter of 2020 “following scheduling review” by the Drug Enforcement Administration.
This story first appeared on Medscape.com.
The Food and Drug Administration has approved cenobamate (Xcopri) for the treatment of partial-onset seizures in adult patients with epilepsy.
The approval on Nov. 21 was based on results from two randomized controlled trials that included more than 600 patients, the agency said in a press release.
Together, the trials showed that the study drug at doses of 100, 200, and 400 mg significantly reduced the percentage of seizures, compared with placebo.
The FDA notes that, although the recommended maintenance dose of the drug is 200 mg/day after titration, some patients may need to be titrated up to 400 mg/day.
“Xcopri is a new option to treat adults with partial-onset seizures, which is an often difficult-to-control condition that can have a significant impact on patient quality of life,” Billy Dunn, MD, director of the Office of Neuroscience in the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research at the FDA, said in a statement.
Adverse events
As reported by Medscape Medical News, results from one of the studies upon which this approval was based were published online last week in Lancet Neurology. The findings showed that both primary endpoints were met.
Although most treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were reported to be mild to moderate in severity, one of these participants receiving the 200 mg dose had a drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS).
The FDA noted that one patient in the other trial also died when the active drug was titrated rapidly.
In an open-label safety trial of 1,339 participants that was also reviewed by the FDA, there were no cases of DRESS when patients started cenobamate at 12.5 mg/day and the dose was adjusted every 2 weeks.
Because more patients who took the drug than those taking placebo had a shortening of the QT interval greater than 20 milliseconds, cenobamate shouldn’t be used in those with hypersensitivity to the drug “or any of the inactive ingredients in Xcopri or Familial Short QT syndrome,” the agency wrote, adding that QT shortening can be associated with ventricular fibrillation, a serious heart rhythm problem.
The FDA also noted that any patient taking an antiepileptic drug should be monitored for the emergence or worsening of depressive symptoms, suicidal thoughts or behaviors, or any other changes in mood.
The most common AEs reported in the trials were somnolence, dizziness, fatigue, and diplopia (double vision).
‘Welcome option’
“The approval of Xcopri will provide clinicians with an effective medication for our patients who are continuing to have focal [partial-onset] seizures,” Michael Sperling, MD, professor of neurology and director of the Jefferson Comprehensive Epilepsy Center, Philadelphia, and an investigator in the drug’s clinical development program, said in a press release from SK Life Science.
“It is very encouraging to see that patients receiving Xcopri saw significant reductions in frequency of seizures, with some even achieving zero seizures,” Dr. Sperling added.
“There is an urgent need to advance research and introduce new treatment options. The FDA approval of Xcopri for the treatment of partial-onset seizures is a welcome option for the epilepsy community,” Beth Lewin Dean, chief executive officer of Citizens United for Research in Epilepsy, said in the same release.
SK Life Science noted in a statement that the drug is expected to be available in the United States in the second quarter of 2020 “following scheduling review” by the Drug Enforcement Administration.
This story first appeared on Medscape.com.
The Food and Drug Administration has approved cenobamate (Xcopri) for the treatment of partial-onset seizures in adult patients with epilepsy.
The approval on Nov. 21 was based on results from two randomized controlled trials that included more than 600 patients, the agency said in a press release.
Together, the trials showed that the study drug at doses of 100, 200, and 400 mg significantly reduced the percentage of seizures, compared with placebo.
The FDA notes that, although the recommended maintenance dose of the drug is 200 mg/day after titration, some patients may need to be titrated up to 400 mg/day.
“Xcopri is a new option to treat adults with partial-onset seizures, which is an often difficult-to-control condition that can have a significant impact on patient quality of life,” Billy Dunn, MD, director of the Office of Neuroscience in the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research at the FDA, said in a statement.
Adverse events
As reported by Medscape Medical News, results from one of the studies upon which this approval was based were published online last week in Lancet Neurology. The findings showed that both primary endpoints were met.
Although most treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were reported to be mild to moderate in severity, one of these participants receiving the 200 mg dose had a drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS).
The FDA noted that one patient in the other trial also died when the active drug was titrated rapidly.
In an open-label safety trial of 1,339 participants that was also reviewed by the FDA, there were no cases of DRESS when patients started cenobamate at 12.5 mg/day and the dose was adjusted every 2 weeks.
Because more patients who took the drug than those taking placebo had a shortening of the QT interval greater than 20 milliseconds, cenobamate shouldn’t be used in those with hypersensitivity to the drug “or any of the inactive ingredients in Xcopri or Familial Short QT syndrome,” the agency wrote, adding that QT shortening can be associated with ventricular fibrillation, a serious heart rhythm problem.
The FDA also noted that any patient taking an antiepileptic drug should be monitored for the emergence or worsening of depressive symptoms, suicidal thoughts or behaviors, or any other changes in mood.
The most common AEs reported in the trials were somnolence, dizziness, fatigue, and diplopia (double vision).
‘Welcome option’
“The approval of Xcopri will provide clinicians with an effective medication for our patients who are continuing to have focal [partial-onset] seizures,” Michael Sperling, MD, professor of neurology and director of the Jefferson Comprehensive Epilepsy Center, Philadelphia, and an investigator in the drug’s clinical development program, said in a press release from SK Life Science.
“It is very encouraging to see that patients receiving Xcopri saw significant reductions in frequency of seizures, with some even achieving zero seizures,” Dr. Sperling added.
“There is an urgent need to advance research and introduce new treatment options. The FDA approval of Xcopri for the treatment of partial-onset seizures is a welcome option for the epilepsy community,” Beth Lewin Dean, chief executive officer of Citizens United for Research in Epilepsy, said in the same release.
SK Life Science noted in a statement that the drug is expected to be available in the United States in the second quarter of 2020 “following scheduling review” by the Drug Enforcement Administration.
This story first appeared on Medscape.com.
Celiac disease may underlie seizures
CHARLOTTE, N.C. – , according to a retrospective chart review presented at the annual meeting of the Child Neurology Society. Associations between celiac disease and seizures may have implications for screening and treatment, said study author Shanna Swartwood, MD, a fellow in the department of pediatric neurology at University of Utah in Salt Lake City.
“Screening for [celiac disease] early in patients with epilepsy, specifically with temporal EEG findings and intractable epilepsy, is warranted given the improvement of seizure burden that may result from exclusion of gluten from the diet,” said Dr. Swartwood and colleagues.
About 10% of patients with celiac disease have clinical neurologic manifestations, such as seizures. To characterize features of epilepsy in a pediatric population with celiac disease and to examine the effect of a gluten-free diet on seizure burden, Dr. Swartwood and colleagues reviewed patients treated at Primary Children’s Hospital in Salt Lake City since 2002. They identified patients with ICD-10 codes for seizures or epilepsy and celiac disease and reviewed 187 charts in all.
In all, 40 patients with seizures had biopsy-proven celiac disease, and 22 had a diagnosis of celiac disease based on the presence of antibodies. Among those with biopsy-proven celiac disease, 43% had intractable seizures. Among those with antibody-positive celiac disease, 31% had intractable seizures.
Among patients with intractable epilepsy, seizure onset preceded the diagnosis of celiac disease by an average of 5 years. For patients with nonintractable epilepsy, the first seizure occurred 1 year before the celiac disease diagnosis on average, but some patients received a celiac disease diagnosis first.
Focal seizures with secondary generalization and generalized tonic clonic seizures were the most common seizure types in this cohort. Epileptiform activity most often was seen in the temporal lobe. While other studies in patients with celiac disease have found occipital epileptiform activity to be the most common, only one patient in this cohort had activity in that location, Dr. Swartwood noted.
Patients with intractable seizures who adhered to a gluten-free diet “had a fairly robust response in terms of seizure improvement,” she said. Seizure improvement, including a decrease in seizure frequency or a decrease in antiepileptic medication dosage, occurred in seven of nine patients in the biopsy-proven group and in two of three patients in the antibody-positive group who adhered to a gluten-free diet and had intractable seizures. One patient was able to stop antiepileptic medication, and one patient had a complete resolution of seizure activity.
The researchers plan to further study the relationship between celiac disease and epilepsy, including whether various HLA subtypes of celiac disease correlate with seizures, said coinvestigator Cristina Trandafir, MD, PhD, assistant professor of pediatric neurology at University of Utah.
The chart review included relatively few patients with limited data. Nevertheless, the results suggest that there may be “substantial lag time” from first seizure to celiac disease diagnosis and that “earlier diagnosis and earlier placement on a gluten-free diet may be beneficial,” Dr. Swartwood said. Celiac disease may be asymptomatic, and screening for celiac disease with a blood test may make sense for patients with intractable seizures, she said.
The researchers had no relevant disclosures.
CHARLOTTE, N.C. – , according to a retrospective chart review presented at the annual meeting of the Child Neurology Society. Associations between celiac disease and seizures may have implications for screening and treatment, said study author Shanna Swartwood, MD, a fellow in the department of pediatric neurology at University of Utah in Salt Lake City.
“Screening for [celiac disease] early in patients with epilepsy, specifically with temporal EEG findings and intractable epilepsy, is warranted given the improvement of seizure burden that may result from exclusion of gluten from the diet,” said Dr. Swartwood and colleagues.
About 10% of patients with celiac disease have clinical neurologic manifestations, such as seizures. To characterize features of epilepsy in a pediatric population with celiac disease and to examine the effect of a gluten-free diet on seizure burden, Dr. Swartwood and colleagues reviewed patients treated at Primary Children’s Hospital in Salt Lake City since 2002. They identified patients with ICD-10 codes for seizures or epilepsy and celiac disease and reviewed 187 charts in all.
In all, 40 patients with seizures had biopsy-proven celiac disease, and 22 had a diagnosis of celiac disease based on the presence of antibodies. Among those with biopsy-proven celiac disease, 43% had intractable seizures. Among those with antibody-positive celiac disease, 31% had intractable seizures.
Among patients with intractable epilepsy, seizure onset preceded the diagnosis of celiac disease by an average of 5 years. For patients with nonintractable epilepsy, the first seizure occurred 1 year before the celiac disease diagnosis on average, but some patients received a celiac disease diagnosis first.
Focal seizures with secondary generalization and generalized tonic clonic seizures were the most common seizure types in this cohort. Epileptiform activity most often was seen in the temporal lobe. While other studies in patients with celiac disease have found occipital epileptiform activity to be the most common, only one patient in this cohort had activity in that location, Dr. Swartwood noted.
Patients with intractable seizures who adhered to a gluten-free diet “had a fairly robust response in terms of seizure improvement,” she said. Seizure improvement, including a decrease in seizure frequency or a decrease in antiepileptic medication dosage, occurred in seven of nine patients in the biopsy-proven group and in two of three patients in the antibody-positive group who adhered to a gluten-free diet and had intractable seizures. One patient was able to stop antiepileptic medication, and one patient had a complete resolution of seizure activity.
The researchers plan to further study the relationship between celiac disease and epilepsy, including whether various HLA subtypes of celiac disease correlate with seizures, said coinvestigator Cristina Trandafir, MD, PhD, assistant professor of pediatric neurology at University of Utah.
The chart review included relatively few patients with limited data. Nevertheless, the results suggest that there may be “substantial lag time” from first seizure to celiac disease diagnosis and that “earlier diagnosis and earlier placement on a gluten-free diet may be beneficial,” Dr. Swartwood said. Celiac disease may be asymptomatic, and screening for celiac disease with a blood test may make sense for patients with intractable seizures, she said.
The researchers had no relevant disclosures.
CHARLOTTE, N.C. – , according to a retrospective chart review presented at the annual meeting of the Child Neurology Society. Associations between celiac disease and seizures may have implications for screening and treatment, said study author Shanna Swartwood, MD, a fellow in the department of pediatric neurology at University of Utah in Salt Lake City.
“Screening for [celiac disease] early in patients with epilepsy, specifically with temporal EEG findings and intractable epilepsy, is warranted given the improvement of seizure burden that may result from exclusion of gluten from the diet,” said Dr. Swartwood and colleagues.
About 10% of patients with celiac disease have clinical neurologic manifestations, such as seizures. To characterize features of epilepsy in a pediatric population with celiac disease and to examine the effect of a gluten-free diet on seizure burden, Dr. Swartwood and colleagues reviewed patients treated at Primary Children’s Hospital in Salt Lake City since 2002. They identified patients with ICD-10 codes for seizures or epilepsy and celiac disease and reviewed 187 charts in all.
In all, 40 patients with seizures had biopsy-proven celiac disease, and 22 had a diagnosis of celiac disease based on the presence of antibodies. Among those with biopsy-proven celiac disease, 43% had intractable seizures. Among those with antibody-positive celiac disease, 31% had intractable seizures.
Among patients with intractable epilepsy, seizure onset preceded the diagnosis of celiac disease by an average of 5 years. For patients with nonintractable epilepsy, the first seizure occurred 1 year before the celiac disease diagnosis on average, but some patients received a celiac disease diagnosis first.
Focal seizures with secondary generalization and generalized tonic clonic seizures were the most common seizure types in this cohort. Epileptiform activity most often was seen in the temporal lobe. While other studies in patients with celiac disease have found occipital epileptiform activity to be the most common, only one patient in this cohort had activity in that location, Dr. Swartwood noted.
Patients with intractable seizures who adhered to a gluten-free diet “had a fairly robust response in terms of seizure improvement,” she said. Seizure improvement, including a decrease in seizure frequency or a decrease in antiepileptic medication dosage, occurred in seven of nine patients in the biopsy-proven group and in two of three patients in the antibody-positive group who adhered to a gluten-free diet and had intractable seizures. One patient was able to stop antiepileptic medication, and one patient had a complete resolution of seizure activity.
The researchers plan to further study the relationship between celiac disease and epilepsy, including whether various HLA subtypes of celiac disease correlate with seizures, said coinvestigator Cristina Trandafir, MD, PhD, assistant professor of pediatric neurology at University of Utah.
The chart review included relatively few patients with limited data. Nevertheless, the results suggest that there may be “substantial lag time” from first seizure to celiac disease diagnosis and that “earlier diagnosis and earlier placement on a gluten-free diet may be beneficial,” Dr. Swartwood said. Celiac disease may be asymptomatic, and screening for celiac disease with a blood test may make sense for patients with intractable seizures, she said.
The researchers had no relevant disclosures.
REPORTING FROM CNS 2019
Pediatric epilepsy surgery may improve cognition and behavior
CHARLOTTE, NC – according to a study presented at the annual meeting of the Child Neurology Society. The presence of comorbidities such as mood disorders and autism may influence the likelihood of perceived improvement, whereas the type of surgery may not.
“The parents and the families of the patients perceive that, even if the patients are not completely seizure free, the behavior and cognitive outcomes are better if there is some sort of seizure improvement,” said Trishna Kantamneni, MD, director of pediatric epilepsy at UC Davis in Sacramento.
To assess behavioral and cognitive outcomes following pediatric epilepsy surgery and to identify factors that predict improvement, Dr. Kantamneni and colleagues at the Cleveland Clinic Epilepsy Center retrospectively reviewed 126 patients younger than 18 years who underwent epilepsy surgery for medically refractory epilepsy during 2009-2016.
The primary outcome measure was the Impact of Childhood Neurologic Disability Scale (ICNDS), a parent-reported scale that assesses the behavior, cognition, and physical or neurologic disability of children with epilepsy. Parents completed the ICNDS preoperatively and at 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. The researchers constructed separate linear mixed effects models to identify predictors of postoperative changes in ICNDS score.
Of the 126 patients, 62.7% were male, the median duration of epilepsy was 4.7 years, and 69.8% were seizure-free at the 2-year follow-up. Postoperative ICNDS scores were available for 103 patients at 6 months and for 54 patients at 24 months.
Before surgery, the average total ICNDS score was 55.7. At 6 months after surgery, the average score was 34.6, and at 24 months, it was 32.1, representing significant improvement from baseline.
In addition, behavior, cognition, and epilepsy subscores also improved post operatively, and the improvement persisted through 24 months. ICNDS scores significantly improved “even in patients who were not seizure-free after surgery,” by an average of about 22 points, the researchers said.
The absence of comorbid autism, cognitive impairment, and global developmental impairment and the absence of anxiety, depression, and ADHD were predictors of improved total ICNDS scores. Tumor pathology and being seizure free at 2 years also predicted improved scores. Duration and type of epilepsy, the number of antiepileptic drugs that patients were taking before surgery, and lobe of surgery were not predictive of improved ICNDS scores.
Dr. Kantamneni had no relevant disclosures.
SOURCE: Kantamneni T et al. CNS 2019, Abstract 51.
CHARLOTTE, NC – according to a study presented at the annual meeting of the Child Neurology Society. The presence of comorbidities such as mood disorders and autism may influence the likelihood of perceived improvement, whereas the type of surgery may not.
“The parents and the families of the patients perceive that, even if the patients are not completely seizure free, the behavior and cognitive outcomes are better if there is some sort of seizure improvement,” said Trishna Kantamneni, MD, director of pediatric epilepsy at UC Davis in Sacramento.
To assess behavioral and cognitive outcomes following pediatric epilepsy surgery and to identify factors that predict improvement, Dr. Kantamneni and colleagues at the Cleveland Clinic Epilepsy Center retrospectively reviewed 126 patients younger than 18 years who underwent epilepsy surgery for medically refractory epilepsy during 2009-2016.
The primary outcome measure was the Impact of Childhood Neurologic Disability Scale (ICNDS), a parent-reported scale that assesses the behavior, cognition, and physical or neurologic disability of children with epilepsy. Parents completed the ICNDS preoperatively and at 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. The researchers constructed separate linear mixed effects models to identify predictors of postoperative changes in ICNDS score.
Of the 126 patients, 62.7% were male, the median duration of epilepsy was 4.7 years, and 69.8% were seizure-free at the 2-year follow-up. Postoperative ICNDS scores were available for 103 patients at 6 months and for 54 patients at 24 months.
Before surgery, the average total ICNDS score was 55.7. At 6 months after surgery, the average score was 34.6, and at 24 months, it was 32.1, representing significant improvement from baseline.
In addition, behavior, cognition, and epilepsy subscores also improved post operatively, and the improvement persisted through 24 months. ICNDS scores significantly improved “even in patients who were not seizure-free after surgery,” by an average of about 22 points, the researchers said.
The absence of comorbid autism, cognitive impairment, and global developmental impairment and the absence of anxiety, depression, and ADHD were predictors of improved total ICNDS scores. Tumor pathology and being seizure free at 2 years also predicted improved scores. Duration and type of epilepsy, the number of antiepileptic drugs that patients were taking before surgery, and lobe of surgery were not predictive of improved ICNDS scores.
Dr. Kantamneni had no relevant disclosures.
SOURCE: Kantamneni T et al. CNS 2019, Abstract 51.
CHARLOTTE, NC – according to a study presented at the annual meeting of the Child Neurology Society. The presence of comorbidities such as mood disorders and autism may influence the likelihood of perceived improvement, whereas the type of surgery may not.
“The parents and the families of the patients perceive that, even if the patients are not completely seizure free, the behavior and cognitive outcomes are better if there is some sort of seizure improvement,” said Trishna Kantamneni, MD, director of pediatric epilepsy at UC Davis in Sacramento.
To assess behavioral and cognitive outcomes following pediatric epilepsy surgery and to identify factors that predict improvement, Dr. Kantamneni and colleagues at the Cleveland Clinic Epilepsy Center retrospectively reviewed 126 patients younger than 18 years who underwent epilepsy surgery for medically refractory epilepsy during 2009-2016.
The primary outcome measure was the Impact of Childhood Neurologic Disability Scale (ICNDS), a parent-reported scale that assesses the behavior, cognition, and physical or neurologic disability of children with epilepsy. Parents completed the ICNDS preoperatively and at 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery. The researchers constructed separate linear mixed effects models to identify predictors of postoperative changes in ICNDS score.
Of the 126 patients, 62.7% were male, the median duration of epilepsy was 4.7 years, and 69.8% were seizure-free at the 2-year follow-up. Postoperative ICNDS scores were available for 103 patients at 6 months and for 54 patients at 24 months.
Before surgery, the average total ICNDS score was 55.7. At 6 months after surgery, the average score was 34.6, and at 24 months, it was 32.1, representing significant improvement from baseline.
In addition, behavior, cognition, and epilepsy subscores also improved post operatively, and the improvement persisted through 24 months. ICNDS scores significantly improved “even in patients who were not seizure-free after surgery,” by an average of about 22 points, the researchers said.
The absence of comorbid autism, cognitive impairment, and global developmental impairment and the absence of anxiety, depression, and ADHD were predictors of improved total ICNDS scores. Tumor pathology and being seizure free at 2 years also predicted improved scores. Duration and type of epilepsy, the number of antiepileptic drugs that patients were taking before surgery, and lobe of surgery were not predictive of improved ICNDS scores.
Dr. Kantamneni had no relevant disclosures.
SOURCE: Kantamneni T et al. CNS 2019, Abstract 51.
REPORTING FROM CNS 2019
Delay in EEG monitoring associated with increased seizure duration in pediatric refractory status epilepticus
CHARLOTTE, NC – , according to a multicenter study that was presented at the annual meeting of the Child Neurology Society. Delays in initiating EEG monitoring are associated with longer seizure duration in this patient population.
Neurologists are advised to initiate continuous EEG monitoring rapidly for all cases of pediatric refractory status epilepticus. Little information is available, however, about patterns in the timing of EEG placement. In addition, the relationship between delays in the initiation of continuous EEG and outcomes of refractory status epilepticus are unknown. Dmitry Tchapyjnikov, MD, assistant professor of child neurology at Duke University in Durham, N.C., and colleagues evaluated trends in the time to continuous EEG initiation and examined whether delays are associated with longer seizure duration in children with refractory status epilepticus.
A retrospective analysis of pSERG data
Dr. Tchapyjnikov and colleagues analyzed data from 11 hospitals participating in the Pediatric Status Epilepticus Research Group (pSERG), a prospective, observational cohort. They focused on pediatric patients who were admitted from 2011 to 2017 with refractory status epilepticus, which they defined as a seizure that persisted after treatment with two or more antiseizure medications (ASMs), one of which had to be a nonbenzodiazepine ASM, or a continuous infusion. Eligible patients were between 1 month and 21 years old and had convulsive seizures at onset. Patients who had EEG placement before seizure onset were excluded.
The investigators included in their study 121 patients who had seizure durations of 3 or more hours. Based on an exploratory analysis of various time-point cutoffs, Dr. Tchapyjnikov and colleagues defined delayed continuous EEG placement as placement at more than 5 hours after seizure onset. They used the Kaplan–Meier estimator to assess time to continuous EEG and used covariate-adjusted proportional hazards models to examine the association between delay in continuous EEG placement and seizure duration.
EEG placement overall was delayed
The median time to continuous EEG placement after seizure onset was 9 hours. Approximately 4% of the children had continuous EEG placed within 1 hour, and 74% had it placed within 24 hours.
The investigators found that seizure onset outside the study hospital was associated with a higher likelihood of delayed time to EEG placement. “Females seemed to be more likely to have timely EEG placement,” said Dr. Tchapyjnikov. “I don’t have a physiological explanation for that.” The researchers saw no difference in treatment between patients who had timely EEG placement and those who had delayed EEG placement.
About 68% of children were having seizures at the time of continuous EEG placement. A presumed seizure etiology of CNS infection was associated with a higher likelihood of being in status epilepticus at the time of EEG placement. A history of epilepsy, developmental delay, or home ASM use, however, was associated with a lower likelihood of being in status epilepticus at time of EEG placement.
Dr. Tchapyjnikov’s group found that the 24-hour cumulative probability of seizure resolution was lower among patients who did not have continuous EEG initiation within 5 hours, compared with those who did (56% vs.70%). The association remained significant after the investigators adjusted the data for covariates that were independently associated with 24-hour seizure resolution (hazard ratio, 0.31).
The investigators included in their analysis patients who had seizure resolution before EEG placement, because restricting the analysis to patients who have persistent status epilepticus would have overemphasized the benefits of EEG, according to Dr. Tchapyjnikov. “Looking at the overall hazard ratios is a more conservative way of looking at these data.”
The study was not supported by external funding. Dr. Tchapyjnikov had no relevant disclosures.
CHARLOTTE, NC – , according to a multicenter study that was presented at the annual meeting of the Child Neurology Society. Delays in initiating EEG monitoring are associated with longer seizure duration in this patient population.
Neurologists are advised to initiate continuous EEG monitoring rapidly for all cases of pediatric refractory status epilepticus. Little information is available, however, about patterns in the timing of EEG placement. In addition, the relationship between delays in the initiation of continuous EEG and outcomes of refractory status epilepticus are unknown. Dmitry Tchapyjnikov, MD, assistant professor of child neurology at Duke University in Durham, N.C., and colleagues evaluated trends in the time to continuous EEG initiation and examined whether delays are associated with longer seizure duration in children with refractory status epilepticus.
A retrospective analysis of pSERG data
Dr. Tchapyjnikov and colleagues analyzed data from 11 hospitals participating in the Pediatric Status Epilepticus Research Group (pSERG), a prospective, observational cohort. They focused on pediatric patients who were admitted from 2011 to 2017 with refractory status epilepticus, which they defined as a seizure that persisted after treatment with two or more antiseizure medications (ASMs), one of which had to be a nonbenzodiazepine ASM, or a continuous infusion. Eligible patients were between 1 month and 21 years old and had convulsive seizures at onset. Patients who had EEG placement before seizure onset were excluded.
The investigators included in their study 121 patients who had seizure durations of 3 or more hours. Based on an exploratory analysis of various time-point cutoffs, Dr. Tchapyjnikov and colleagues defined delayed continuous EEG placement as placement at more than 5 hours after seizure onset. They used the Kaplan–Meier estimator to assess time to continuous EEG and used covariate-adjusted proportional hazards models to examine the association between delay in continuous EEG placement and seizure duration.
EEG placement overall was delayed
The median time to continuous EEG placement after seizure onset was 9 hours. Approximately 4% of the children had continuous EEG placed within 1 hour, and 74% had it placed within 24 hours.
The investigators found that seizure onset outside the study hospital was associated with a higher likelihood of delayed time to EEG placement. “Females seemed to be more likely to have timely EEG placement,” said Dr. Tchapyjnikov. “I don’t have a physiological explanation for that.” The researchers saw no difference in treatment between patients who had timely EEG placement and those who had delayed EEG placement.
About 68% of children were having seizures at the time of continuous EEG placement. A presumed seizure etiology of CNS infection was associated with a higher likelihood of being in status epilepticus at the time of EEG placement. A history of epilepsy, developmental delay, or home ASM use, however, was associated with a lower likelihood of being in status epilepticus at time of EEG placement.
Dr. Tchapyjnikov’s group found that the 24-hour cumulative probability of seizure resolution was lower among patients who did not have continuous EEG initiation within 5 hours, compared with those who did (56% vs.70%). The association remained significant after the investigators adjusted the data for covariates that were independently associated with 24-hour seizure resolution (hazard ratio, 0.31).
The investigators included in their analysis patients who had seizure resolution before EEG placement, because restricting the analysis to patients who have persistent status epilepticus would have overemphasized the benefits of EEG, according to Dr. Tchapyjnikov. “Looking at the overall hazard ratios is a more conservative way of looking at these data.”
The study was not supported by external funding. Dr. Tchapyjnikov had no relevant disclosures.
CHARLOTTE, NC – , according to a multicenter study that was presented at the annual meeting of the Child Neurology Society. Delays in initiating EEG monitoring are associated with longer seizure duration in this patient population.
Neurologists are advised to initiate continuous EEG monitoring rapidly for all cases of pediatric refractory status epilepticus. Little information is available, however, about patterns in the timing of EEG placement. In addition, the relationship between delays in the initiation of continuous EEG and outcomes of refractory status epilepticus are unknown. Dmitry Tchapyjnikov, MD, assistant professor of child neurology at Duke University in Durham, N.C., and colleagues evaluated trends in the time to continuous EEG initiation and examined whether delays are associated with longer seizure duration in children with refractory status epilepticus.
A retrospective analysis of pSERG data
Dr. Tchapyjnikov and colleagues analyzed data from 11 hospitals participating in the Pediatric Status Epilepticus Research Group (pSERG), a prospective, observational cohort. They focused on pediatric patients who were admitted from 2011 to 2017 with refractory status epilepticus, which they defined as a seizure that persisted after treatment with two or more antiseizure medications (ASMs), one of which had to be a nonbenzodiazepine ASM, or a continuous infusion. Eligible patients were between 1 month and 21 years old and had convulsive seizures at onset. Patients who had EEG placement before seizure onset were excluded.
The investigators included in their study 121 patients who had seizure durations of 3 or more hours. Based on an exploratory analysis of various time-point cutoffs, Dr. Tchapyjnikov and colleagues defined delayed continuous EEG placement as placement at more than 5 hours after seizure onset. They used the Kaplan–Meier estimator to assess time to continuous EEG and used covariate-adjusted proportional hazards models to examine the association between delay in continuous EEG placement and seizure duration.
EEG placement overall was delayed
The median time to continuous EEG placement after seizure onset was 9 hours. Approximately 4% of the children had continuous EEG placed within 1 hour, and 74% had it placed within 24 hours.
The investigators found that seizure onset outside the study hospital was associated with a higher likelihood of delayed time to EEG placement. “Females seemed to be more likely to have timely EEG placement,” said Dr. Tchapyjnikov. “I don’t have a physiological explanation for that.” The researchers saw no difference in treatment between patients who had timely EEG placement and those who had delayed EEG placement.
About 68% of children were having seizures at the time of continuous EEG placement. A presumed seizure etiology of CNS infection was associated with a higher likelihood of being in status epilepticus at the time of EEG placement. A history of epilepsy, developmental delay, or home ASM use, however, was associated with a lower likelihood of being in status epilepticus at time of EEG placement.
Dr. Tchapyjnikov’s group found that the 24-hour cumulative probability of seizure resolution was lower among patients who did not have continuous EEG initiation within 5 hours, compared with those who did (56% vs.70%). The association remained significant after the investigators adjusted the data for covariates that were independently associated with 24-hour seizure resolution (hazard ratio, 0.31).
The investigators included in their analysis patients who had seizure resolution before EEG placement, because restricting the analysis to patients who have persistent status epilepticus would have overemphasized the benefits of EEG, according to Dr. Tchapyjnikov. “Looking at the overall hazard ratios is a more conservative way of looking at these data.”
The study was not supported by external funding. Dr. Tchapyjnikov had no relevant disclosures.
REPORTING FROM CNS 2019
Does AED prophylaxis delay seizure onset in children with brain tumors?
CHARLOTTE, N.C. – according to research presented at the annual meeting of the Child Neurology Society. Levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, and phenytoin are the most common initial prophylactic AEDs administered to children with brain tumors, the researchers said.
The literature indicates that between 20% and 35% of children with brain tumors have seizures, and up to half of these patients have seizure as their presenting symptom. Common practice is to prescribe antiseizure medication after a child has had a first seizure, because the risk for recurrence is high. In 2000, the American Academy of Neurology discouraged prophylactic use of AEDs in children, citing a lack of evidence for efficacy. Most of the data that it reviewed, however, came from adults.
Michelle Yun, a medical student at Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, and colleagues used national Medicaid claims data that had been collected between 2009 and 2012 for children with seizures to conduct a retrospective, observational, case-control study. They included children aged 0-20 years with a diagnosis of brain tumor, a seizure diagnosis within 6 months after brain tumor diagnosis, an AED prescription, and 12 continuous months of Medicaid coverage following brain tumor diagnosis in their analysis. The investigators defined seizure prophylaxis as AED prescription within 30 days after brain tumor diagnosis but before a first seizure diagnosis.
The exposure in the study was AED prescription within 45 days of diagnosis, and the outcome was the time to first seizure. Ms. Yun and colleagues also analyzed the most common initial prophylactic AEDs and the proportion of cases with first seizure diagnosis after prophylactic AED discontinuation, which was defined as a treatment gap longer than 30 days. The study covariates included age, sex, race, ethnicity, and medical comorbidities.
In all, 218 children were included in the study; 40 received AED prophylaxis and 26 received it within 45 days of brain tumor diagnosis. Patients with and without AED prophylaxis were well matched on all covariates.
At 1 year, Ms. Yun and colleagues saw no difference in time to first seizure between the two groups. The median time to first seizure was 75 days in the prophylaxis group and 80 days in the no-prophylaxis group. The researchers observed a transient separation between the two groups, however, in the early months after brain tumor diagnosis. When they examined children who had a seizure during the first 6 months of follow-up, the median time to diagnosis of first seizure was 68 days in children with prophylaxis and 34 days in the no-prophylaxis group. The difference between groups was statistically significant. “When we added all the covariates of interest, we found that there was a protective effect in these children with early seizures,” said Ms. Yun.
Among the study limitations that Ms. Yun acknowledged were its observational, retrospective design and its small sample size. Medicaid data themselves are limited, since states do not report them in a uniform manner, and the data do not include much clinical information. “Something that would be helpful is a prospective clinical study,” Ms. Yun concluded.
The Weill Cornell Clinical and Translational Science Center and the American Academy of Neurology provided funding for the study. The Pediatric Epilepsy Research Foundation provided the Medicaid data. Ms. Yun had no relevant disclosures.
SOURCE: Yun M et al. CNS 2019, Abstract PL2-1.
CHARLOTTE, N.C. – according to research presented at the annual meeting of the Child Neurology Society. Levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, and phenytoin are the most common initial prophylactic AEDs administered to children with brain tumors, the researchers said.
The literature indicates that between 20% and 35% of children with brain tumors have seizures, and up to half of these patients have seizure as their presenting symptom. Common practice is to prescribe antiseizure medication after a child has had a first seizure, because the risk for recurrence is high. In 2000, the American Academy of Neurology discouraged prophylactic use of AEDs in children, citing a lack of evidence for efficacy. Most of the data that it reviewed, however, came from adults.
Michelle Yun, a medical student at Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, and colleagues used national Medicaid claims data that had been collected between 2009 and 2012 for children with seizures to conduct a retrospective, observational, case-control study. They included children aged 0-20 years with a diagnosis of brain tumor, a seizure diagnosis within 6 months after brain tumor diagnosis, an AED prescription, and 12 continuous months of Medicaid coverage following brain tumor diagnosis in their analysis. The investigators defined seizure prophylaxis as AED prescription within 30 days after brain tumor diagnosis but before a first seizure diagnosis.
The exposure in the study was AED prescription within 45 days of diagnosis, and the outcome was the time to first seizure. Ms. Yun and colleagues also analyzed the most common initial prophylactic AEDs and the proportion of cases with first seizure diagnosis after prophylactic AED discontinuation, which was defined as a treatment gap longer than 30 days. The study covariates included age, sex, race, ethnicity, and medical comorbidities.
In all, 218 children were included in the study; 40 received AED prophylaxis and 26 received it within 45 days of brain tumor diagnosis. Patients with and without AED prophylaxis were well matched on all covariates.
At 1 year, Ms. Yun and colleagues saw no difference in time to first seizure between the two groups. The median time to first seizure was 75 days in the prophylaxis group and 80 days in the no-prophylaxis group. The researchers observed a transient separation between the two groups, however, in the early months after brain tumor diagnosis. When they examined children who had a seizure during the first 6 months of follow-up, the median time to diagnosis of first seizure was 68 days in children with prophylaxis and 34 days in the no-prophylaxis group. The difference between groups was statistically significant. “When we added all the covariates of interest, we found that there was a protective effect in these children with early seizures,” said Ms. Yun.
Among the study limitations that Ms. Yun acknowledged were its observational, retrospective design and its small sample size. Medicaid data themselves are limited, since states do not report them in a uniform manner, and the data do not include much clinical information. “Something that would be helpful is a prospective clinical study,” Ms. Yun concluded.
The Weill Cornell Clinical and Translational Science Center and the American Academy of Neurology provided funding for the study. The Pediatric Epilepsy Research Foundation provided the Medicaid data. Ms. Yun had no relevant disclosures.
SOURCE: Yun M et al. CNS 2019, Abstract PL2-1.
CHARLOTTE, N.C. – according to research presented at the annual meeting of the Child Neurology Society. Levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, and phenytoin are the most common initial prophylactic AEDs administered to children with brain tumors, the researchers said.
The literature indicates that between 20% and 35% of children with brain tumors have seizures, and up to half of these patients have seizure as their presenting symptom. Common practice is to prescribe antiseizure medication after a child has had a first seizure, because the risk for recurrence is high. In 2000, the American Academy of Neurology discouraged prophylactic use of AEDs in children, citing a lack of evidence for efficacy. Most of the data that it reviewed, however, came from adults.
Michelle Yun, a medical student at Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, and colleagues used national Medicaid claims data that had been collected between 2009 and 2012 for children with seizures to conduct a retrospective, observational, case-control study. They included children aged 0-20 years with a diagnosis of brain tumor, a seizure diagnosis within 6 months after brain tumor diagnosis, an AED prescription, and 12 continuous months of Medicaid coverage following brain tumor diagnosis in their analysis. The investigators defined seizure prophylaxis as AED prescription within 30 days after brain tumor diagnosis but before a first seizure diagnosis.
The exposure in the study was AED prescription within 45 days of diagnosis, and the outcome was the time to first seizure. Ms. Yun and colleagues also analyzed the most common initial prophylactic AEDs and the proportion of cases with first seizure diagnosis after prophylactic AED discontinuation, which was defined as a treatment gap longer than 30 days. The study covariates included age, sex, race, ethnicity, and medical comorbidities.
In all, 218 children were included in the study; 40 received AED prophylaxis and 26 received it within 45 days of brain tumor diagnosis. Patients with and without AED prophylaxis were well matched on all covariates.
At 1 year, Ms. Yun and colleagues saw no difference in time to first seizure between the two groups. The median time to first seizure was 75 days in the prophylaxis group and 80 days in the no-prophylaxis group. The researchers observed a transient separation between the two groups, however, in the early months after brain tumor diagnosis. When they examined children who had a seizure during the first 6 months of follow-up, the median time to diagnosis of first seizure was 68 days in children with prophylaxis and 34 days in the no-prophylaxis group. The difference between groups was statistically significant. “When we added all the covariates of interest, we found that there was a protective effect in these children with early seizures,” said Ms. Yun.
Among the study limitations that Ms. Yun acknowledged were its observational, retrospective design and its small sample size. Medicaid data themselves are limited, since states do not report them in a uniform manner, and the data do not include much clinical information. “Something that would be helpful is a prospective clinical study,” Ms. Yun concluded.
The Weill Cornell Clinical and Translational Science Center and the American Academy of Neurology provided funding for the study. The Pediatric Epilepsy Research Foundation provided the Medicaid data. Ms. Yun had no relevant disclosures.
SOURCE: Yun M et al. CNS 2019, Abstract PL2-1.
REPORTING FROM CNS 2019
CBD: What physicians need to know about it
Cannabidiol is a derivative of marijuana that is sold everywhere from medical marijuana stores to health food markets to gas stations. While this chemical is derived from marijuana plants, it can be sold in many states as a supplement and is largely unregulated. The ubiquity of cannabidiol (CBD) and its potential benefits means that doctors need to be able to counsel patients about what we know, what we don’t, and how to use it safely. For conditions such as chronic pain and addiction, where we have few safe and effective alternatives, CBD may be reasonable to recommend.
To find out what physicians need to know about CBD, Elisabeth Poorman, MD, a general internist at a University of Washington neighborhood clinic in Kent and member of the editorial advisory board of Internal Medicine News, interviewed Peter Grinspoon, MD, who provides free consultation to primary care patients on the benefits and risks of using various forms of cannabis, including CBD. Dr. Grinspoon is an internist at Massachusetts General Hospital Chelsea Healthcare Center and is an instructor at Harvard Medical School, Boston. He has contributed to the Harvard Health Blog on the topic of medical marijuana, delivered grand rounds on cannabis at Massachusetts General Hospital, and lectured at the American College of Physicians. Dr. Grinspoon is also medical director for Galenas, a medical marijuana company.
Dr. Grinspoon is the son of Lester Grinspoon, MD, associate professor emeritus of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, who researched the medicinal legitimacy of marijuana prohibition and has authored books on the medical benefits of marijuana.
and his knowledge of CBD’s efficacy for various medical conditions. Below are excerpts from that conversation.
Dr. Poorman: How do you explain the difference between THC and CBD to patients?
Dr. Grinspoon: Cannabis contains at least a hundred different chemicals called cannabinoids, of which tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and CBD are the most prevalent. THC is the one that gets you high and can be used recreationally and medically. The CBD molecule is not intoxicating, and people use it for a variety of medical purposes, most commonly to treat anxiety, insomnia, and pain.
Dr. Poorman: There are a lot of gaps in what we now about CBD’s potential benefits. Why don’t we know more?
Dr. Grinspoon: CBD has no abuse liability according to the World Health Organization, but because it is a cannabinoid, it is still technically a schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act, and that makes it difficult to study.
Dr. Poorman: What kinds of conditions can CBD treat?
Dr. Grinspoon: In anxiety, the enthusiasm has outpaced the science; there’s no question about that. And most of the studies have done in animals. That said, some studies have shown that CBD helps treat components of anxiety, like public speaking. Unlike THC, it is nonintoxicating and non–habit forming. But we don’t have the wealth of randomized controlled trials that we have for official psychiatric medications.
CBD’s benefits have been most extensively studied in pediatric epilepsy. The one Food and Drug Administration–approved drug derived from cannabis is Epidiolex, used to treat rare forms of childhood epilepsy. There is some evidence that as an adjunct, it can be used for glioblastoma multiforme in patients receiving other appropriate therapy. There is also some preliminary evidence that it can be used for addiction, including to opioids, cannabis, tobacco, and stimulants.
Most of the evidence for using CBD in chronic pain comes from animal studies, including a study published in the European Journal of Pain in 2016. Among my patients to whom I have suggested CBD for chronic pain, a few have noticed great benefit, a few have noticed some benefit, and a lot have noticed no benefit. For those who have said they noticed benefit it is unclear whether that benefit was just the placebo effect.
In insomnia, I usually have them take CBD under the tongue half an hour time before bedtime, or if it’s an edible, an hour before bedtime. I start with a lower dose and slowly try higher doses. I also encourage them to do the other sleep hygiene things, like no screens, increasing exercise, and decreasing caffeine. It seems that CBD helps them fall asleep, though it’s hard to know if it’s the CBD or the fact that they have started taking something, and have simultaneously made various lifestyle changes.
Dr. Poorman: Can CBD interfere with your normal sleep architecture, the way benzodiazepines and Benadryl can?
Dr. Grinspoon: We know that THC affects your sleep architecture and affects what percentage of REM sleep you have. But I don’t know if the effects of CBD on sleep architecture have been studied.
Dr. Poorman: What harms do you counsel patients about when discussing CBD?
Dr. Grinspoon: There are four main harms. The first is the price. It’s overpriced, and the doses are very low. In most animal studies, the doses are about 20 milligrams per kilogram of weight. And you go to the market, and it’s like a dollar for a hundredth of that.
Number two is that it’s not regulated; it’s a supplement. A few years ago, the government tested a bunch of samples of CBD, and some didn’t actually contain CBD, some didn’t have the right amount; and worse, some contained THC that had not been disclosed in the packaging. So you can’t just go to a roadside gas station and assume that if you buy CBD, it’s actually that. You want a place that has a certificate of assurance. Make sure third-party testing was done, including testing for pesticides and other heavy metals.
The third thing is drug interactions. It affects the body like grapefruit and inhibits the cytochrome P450 system. The medications doctors should be most concerned about are blood thinners like Coumadin. And if you’re on blood thinners, you definitely want to tell your doctor that you are on CBD and he or she might want to check your blood levels more frequently than they usually do.
The fourth concern is liver inflammation. In the childhood epilepsy studies, a bump in some liver enzymes was seen, although I haven’t heard of any clinically significant cases of chemical hepatitis related to CBD. But if someone has liver disease you want to keep an eye on their liver enzymes.
Dr. Poorman: What methods of ingestion do you recommend or not recommend?
Dr. Grinspoon: It’s basically trial and error, but I usually recommend oral form. If people feel comfortable taking a gummy bear, or a pill, I’m not particular about that. If the product being taken contains less than 0.3% THC, it won’t get you high.
The topical form probably works better for treating chronic pain if it contains some THC, suggests a review article published in the Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine. Topical THC is nonintoxicating, unless you managed to sit in a bathtub for 8 hours after applying it.
I don’t recommend smoking CBD, and right now, I don’t recommend vaping anything.
If people have severe pain, like moderately severe arthritis, CBD may not be enough, whereas medical cannabis with THC could help, a report suggests.
Dr. Poorman: Do you ever encourage patients to stop using CBD products?
Dr. Grinspoon: I work in a low-income area, and my patients don’t have a ton of disposable income. If it’s not working, I worry about the expense.
Dr. Poorman: The CBD industry is growing quickly. What changes are you seeing in what products are out there, and what changes would you like to see?
Dr. Grinspoon: CBD is being put in everything, and it’s comical. On the one hand, you can say if people want to waste their money on a CBD emitting pillowcase, that’s fine. On the other hand, you can say that certainly seems like misleading advertising, because a CBD emitting pillowcase isn’t going to help you sleep any better.
I think the purported benefits are far beyond what we can say scientifically. We do know that CBD has anti-inflammatory characteristics. But that doesn’t mean that putting CBD in all skin products is good for your skin. It’s bad for your pocketbook, though. I would like there to be less of a gap between the claims and the science.
Dr. Elisabeth Poorman has no conflicts to disclose.
Cannabidiol is a derivative of marijuana that is sold everywhere from medical marijuana stores to health food markets to gas stations. While this chemical is derived from marijuana plants, it can be sold in many states as a supplement and is largely unregulated. The ubiquity of cannabidiol (CBD) and its potential benefits means that doctors need to be able to counsel patients about what we know, what we don’t, and how to use it safely. For conditions such as chronic pain and addiction, where we have few safe and effective alternatives, CBD may be reasonable to recommend.
To find out what physicians need to know about CBD, Elisabeth Poorman, MD, a general internist at a University of Washington neighborhood clinic in Kent and member of the editorial advisory board of Internal Medicine News, interviewed Peter Grinspoon, MD, who provides free consultation to primary care patients on the benefits and risks of using various forms of cannabis, including CBD. Dr. Grinspoon is an internist at Massachusetts General Hospital Chelsea Healthcare Center and is an instructor at Harvard Medical School, Boston. He has contributed to the Harvard Health Blog on the topic of medical marijuana, delivered grand rounds on cannabis at Massachusetts General Hospital, and lectured at the American College of Physicians. Dr. Grinspoon is also medical director for Galenas, a medical marijuana company.
Dr. Grinspoon is the son of Lester Grinspoon, MD, associate professor emeritus of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, who researched the medicinal legitimacy of marijuana prohibition and has authored books on the medical benefits of marijuana.
and his knowledge of CBD’s efficacy for various medical conditions. Below are excerpts from that conversation.
Dr. Poorman: How do you explain the difference between THC and CBD to patients?
Dr. Grinspoon: Cannabis contains at least a hundred different chemicals called cannabinoids, of which tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and CBD are the most prevalent. THC is the one that gets you high and can be used recreationally and medically. The CBD molecule is not intoxicating, and people use it for a variety of medical purposes, most commonly to treat anxiety, insomnia, and pain.
Dr. Poorman: There are a lot of gaps in what we now about CBD’s potential benefits. Why don’t we know more?
Dr. Grinspoon: CBD has no abuse liability according to the World Health Organization, but because it is a cannabinoid, it is still technically a schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act, and that makes it difficult to study.
Dr. Poorman: What kinds of conditions can CBD treat?
Dr. Grinspoon: In anxiety, the enthusiasm has outpaced the science; there’s no question about that. And most of the studies have done in animals. That said, some studies have shown that CBD helps treat components of anxiety, like public speaking. Unlike THC, it is nonintoxicating and non–habit forming. But we don’t have the wealth of randomized controlled trials that we have for official psychiatric medications.
CBD’s benefits have been most extensively studied in pediatric epilepsy. The one Food and Drug Administration–approved drug derived from cannabis is Epidiolex, used to treat rare forms of childhood epilepsy. There is some evidence that as an adjunct, it can be used for glioblastoma multiforme in patients receiving other appropriate therapy. There is also some preliminary evidence that it can be used for addiction, including to opioids, cannabis, tobacco, and stimulants.
Most of the evidence for using CBD in chronic pain comes from animal studies, including a study published in the European Journal of Pain in 2016. Among my patients to whom I have suggested CBD for chronic pain, a few have noticed great benefit, a few have noticed some benefit, and a lot have noticed no benefit. For those who have said they noticed benefit it is unclear whether that benefit was just the placebo effect.
In insomnia, I usually have them take CBD under the tongue half an hour time before bedtime, or if it’s an edible, an hour before bedtime. I start with a lower dose and slowly try higher doses. I also encourage them to do the other sleep hygiene things, like no screens, increasing exercise, and decreasing caffeine. It seems that CBD helps them fall asleep, though it’s hard to know if it’s the CBD or the fact that they have started taking something, and have simultaneously made various lifestyle changes.
Dr. Poorman: Can CBD interfere with your normal sleep architecture, the way benzodiazepines and Benadryl can?
Dr. Grinspoon: We know that THC affects your sleep architecture and affects what percentage of REM sleep you have. But I don’t know if the effects of CBD on sleep architecture have been studied.
Dr. Poorman: What harms do you counsel patients about when discussing CBD?
Dr. Grinspoon: There are four main harms. The first is the price. It’s overpriced, and the doses are very low. In most animal studies, the doses are about 20 milligrams per kilogram of weight. And you go to the market, and it’s like a dollar for a hundredth of that.
Number two is that it’s not regulated; it’s a supplement. A few years ago, the government tested a bunch of samples of CBD, and some didn’t actually contain CBD, some didn’t have the right amount; and worse, some contained THC that had not been disclosed in the packaging. So you can’t just go to a roadside gas station and assume that if you buy CBD, it’s actually that. You want a place that has a certificate of assurance. Make sure third-party testing was done, including testing for pesticides and other heavy metals.
The third thing is drug interactions. It affects the body like grapefruit and inhibits the cytochrome P450 system. The medications doctors should be most concerned about are blood thinners like Coumadin. And if you’re on blood thinners, you definitely want to tell your doctor that you are on CBD and he or she might want to check your blood levels more frequently than they usually do.
The fourth concern is liver inflammation. In the childhood epilepsy studies, a bump in some liver enzymes was seen, although I haven’t heard of any clinically significant cases of chemical hepatitis related to CBD. But if someone has liver disease you want to keep an eye on their liver enzymes.
Dr. Poorman: What methods of ingestion do you recommend or not recommend?
Dr. Grinspoon: It’s basically trial and error, but I usually recommend oral form. If people feel comfortable taking a gummy bear, or a pill, I’m not particular about that. If the product being taken contains less than 0.3% THC, it won’t get you high.
The topical form probably works better for treating chronic pain if it contains some THC, suggests a review article published in the Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine. Topical THC is nonintoxicating, unless you managed to sit in a bathtub for 8 hours after applying it.
I don’t recommend smoking CBD, and right now, I don’t recommend vaping anything.
If people have severe pain, like moderately severe arthritis, CBD may not be enough, whereas medical cannabis with THC could help, a report suggests.
Dr. Poorman: Do you ever encourage patients to stop using CBD products?
Dr. Grinspoon: I work in a low-income area, and my patients don’t have a ton of disposable income. If it’s not working, I worry about the expense.
Dr. Poorman: The CBD industry is growing quickly. What changes are you seeing in what products are out there, and what changes would you like to see?
Dr. Grinspoon: CBD is being put in everything, and it’s comical. On the one hand, you can say if people want to waste their money on a CBD emitting pillowcase, that’s fine. On the other hand, you can say that certainly seems like misleading advertising, because a CBD emitting pillowcase isn’t going to help you sleep any better.
I think the purported benefits are far beyond what we can say scientifically. We do know that CBD has anti-inflammatory characteristics. But that doesn’t mean that putting CBD in all skin products is good for your skin. It’s bad for your pocketbook, though. I would like there to be less of a gap between the claims and the science.
Dr. Elisabeth Poorman has no conflicts to disclose.
Cannabidiol is a derivative of marijuana that is sold everywhere from medical marijuana stores to health food markets to gas stations. While this chemical is derived from marijuana plants, it can be sold in many states as a supplement and is largely unregulated. The ubiquity of cannabidiol (CBD) and its potential benefits means that doctors need to be able to counsel patients about what we know, what we don’t, and how to use it safely. For conditions such as chronic pain and addiction, where we have few safe and effective alternatives, CBD may be reasonable to recommend.
To find out what physicians need to know about CBD, Elisabeth Poorman, MD, a general internist at a University of Washington neighborhood clinic in Kent and member of the editorial advisory board of Internal Medicine News, interviewed Peter Grinspoon, MD, who provides free consultation to primary care patients on the benefits and risks of using various forms of cannabis, including CBD. Dr. Grinspoon is an internist at Massachusetts General Hospital Chelsea Healthcare Center and is an instructor at Harvard Medical School, Boston. He has contributed to the Harvard Health Blog on the topic of medical marijuana, delivered grand rounds on cannabis at Massachusetts General Hospital, and lectured at the American College of Physicians. Dr. Grinspoon is also medical director for Galenas, a medical marijuana company.
Dr. Grinspoon is the son of Lester Grinspoon, MD, associate professor emeritus of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, who researched the medicinal legitimacy of marijuana prohibition and has authored books on the medical benefits of marijuana.
and his knowledge of CBD’s efficacy for various medical conditions. Below are excerpts from that conversation.
Dr. Poorman: How do you explain the difference between THC and CBD to patients?
Dr. Grinspoon: Cannabis contains at least a hundred different chemicals called cannabinoids, of which tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and CBD are the most prevalent. THC is the one that gets you high and can be used recreationally and medically. The CBD molecule is not intoxicating, and people use it for a variety of medical purposes, most commonly to treat anxiety, insomnia, and pain.
Dr. Poorman: There are a lot of gaps in what we now about CBD’s potential benefits. Why don’t we know more?
Dr. Grinspoon: CBD has no abuse liability according to the World Health Organization, but because it is a cannabinoid, it is still technically a schedule I substance under the Controlled Substances Act, and that makes it difficult to study.
Dr. Poorman: What kinds of conditions can CBD treat?
Dr. Grinspoon: In anxiety, the enthusiasm has outpaced the science; there’s no question about that. And most of the studies have done in animals. That said, some studies have shown that CBD helps treat components of anxiety, like public speaking. Unlike THC, it is nonintoxicating and non–habit forming. But we don’t have the wealth of randomized controlled trials that we have for official psychiatric medications.
CBD’s benefits have been most extensively studied in pediatric epilepsy. The one Food and Drug Administration–approved drug derived from cannabis is Epidiolex, used to treat rare forms of childhood epilepsy. There is some evidence that as an adjunct, it can be used for glioblastoma multiforme in patients receiving other appropriate therapy. There is also some preliminary evidence that it can be used for addiction, including to opioids, cannabis, tobacco, and stimulants.
Most of the evidence for using CBD in chronic pain comes from animal studies, including a study published in the European Journal of Pain in 2016. Among my patients to whom I have suggested CBD for chronic pain, a few have noticed great benefit, a few have noticed some benefit, and a lot have noticed no benefit. For those who have said they noticed benefit it is unclear whether that benefit was just the placebo effect.
In insomnia, I usually have them take CBD under the tongue half an hour time before bedtime, or if it’s an edible, an hour before bedtime. I start with a lower dose and slowly try higher doses. I also encourage them to do the other sleep hygiene things, like no screens, increasing exercise, and decreasing caffeine. It seems that CBD helps them fall asleep, though it’s hard to know if it’s the CBD or the fact that they have started taking something, and have simultaneously made various lifestyle changes.
Dr. Poorman: Can CBD interfere with your normal sleep architecture, the way benzodiazepines and Benadryl can?
Dr. Grinspoon: We know that THC affects your sleep architecture and affects what percentage of REM sleep you have. But I don’t know if the effects of CBD on sleep architecture have been studied.
Dr. Poorman: What harms do you counsel patients about when discussing CBD?
Dr. Grinspoon: There are four main harms. The first is the price. It’s overpriced, and the doses are very low. In most animal studies, the doses are about 20 milligrams per kilogram of weight. And you go to the market, and it’s like a dollar for a hundredth of that.
Number two is that it’s not regulated; it’s a supplement. A few years ago, the government tested a bunch of samples of CBD, and some didn’t actually contain CBD, some didn’t have the right amount; and worse, some contained THC that had not been disclosed in the packaging. So you can’t just go to a roadside gas station and assume that if you buy CBD, it’s actually that. You want a place that has a certificate of assurance. Make sure third-party testing was done, including testing for pesticides and other heavy metals.
The third thing is drug interactions. It affects the body like grapefruit and inhibits the cytochrome P450 system. The medications doctors should be most concerned about are blood thinners like Coumadin. And if you’re on blood thinners, you definitely want to tell your doctor that you are on CBD and he or she might want to check your blood levels more frequently than they usually do.
The fourth concern is liver inflammation. In the childhood epilepsy studies, a bump in some liver enzymes was seen, although I haven’t heard of any clinically significant cases of chemical hepatitis related to CBD. But if someone has liver disease you want to keep an eye on their liver enzymes.
Dr. Poorman: What methods of ingestion do you recommend or not recommend?
Dr. Grinspoon: It’s basically trial and error, but I usually recommend oral form. If people feel comfortable taking a gummy bear, or a pill, I’m not particular about that. If the product being taken contains less than 0.3% THC, it won’t get you high.
The topical form probably works better for treating chronic pain if it contains some THC, suggests a review article published in the Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine. Topical THC is nonintoxicating, unless you managed to sit in a bathtub for 8 hours after applying it.
I don’t recommend smoking CBD, and right now, I don’t recommend vaping anything.
If people have severe pain, like moderately severe arthritis, CBD may not be enough, whereas medical cannabis with THC could help, a report suggests.
Dr. Poorman: Do you ever encourage patients to stop using CBD products?
Dr. Grinspoon: I work in a low-income area, and my patients don’t have a ton of disposable income. If it’s not working, I worry about the expense.
Dr. Poorman: The CBD industry is growing quickly. What changes are you seeing in what products are out there, and what changes would you like to see?
Dr. Grinspoon: CBD is being put in everything, and it’s comical. On the one hand, you can say if people want to waste their money on a CBD emitting pillowcase, that’s fine. On the other hand, you can say that certainly seems like misleading advertising, because a CBD emitting pillowcase isn’t going to help you sleep any better.
I think the purported benefits are far beyond what we can say scientifically. We do know that CBD has anti-inflammatory characteristics. But that doesn’t mean that putting CBD in all skin products is good for your skin. It’s bad for your pocketbook, though. I would like there to be less of a gap between the claims and the science.
Dr. Elisabeth Poorman has no conflicts to disclose.
Is serum serotonin level associated with risk of seizure-related breathing dysfunction?
, according to research published online Sept. 4 in Neurology. The change in serotonin level may reflect physiologic changes that protect against harmful processes that promote sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP), the authors wrote.
“Our results give new insight into a possible link between serotonin levels and breathing during and after seizure,” Samden D. Lhatoo, MD, professor of neurology at McGovern Medical School at the University of Texas Health Science Center in Houston, said in a press release. “This may give hope that perhaps someday new therapies could be developed that may help prevent SUDEP. However, our study was small, and much more research is needed to confirm our findings in larger groups before any treatment decisions can be made. It is also important to note that excess serotonin can be harmful, so we strongly recommend against anyone trying to find ways to increase their serotonin levels in response to our study findings.”
Animal and human studies have indicated that breathing dysfunction related to SUDEP may involve serotonergic pathways. Compared with controls, patients with SUDEP have fewer midline serotonergic neurons. Furthermore, a 2018 study suggested an association between severe seizures and decreased serotonergic tone in the postictal state.
Dr. Lhatoo and colleagues examined a prospective cohort of patients with intractable epilepsy to understand the relationship between serum serotonin levels, ictal central apnea (ICA), and postconvulsive central apnea (PCCA). Patients were aged 18 years or older, were admitted to the epilepsy monitoring unit from January 2015 to April 2018, and agreed to take part in an investigation of SUDEP biomarkers. Dr. Lhatoo and colleagues evaluated video EEG, plethysmography, capillary oxygen saturation, and ECG for 49 patients. After a patient had a clinical seizure, the researchers collected postictal and interictal venous blood samples from him or her to measure serum serotonin levels. They classified seizures using the International League Against Epilepsy 2017 seizure classification. Dr. Lhatoo and colleagues analyzed 49 seizures with and without ICA and 27 generalized convulsive seizures with and without PCCA.
Of the 49 patients, 29 were female. Participants’ mean age was 42 years, mean age at epilepsy onset was 25.2 years, and mean epilepsy duration was 16.8 years. The population’s mean body mass index was 28.9. Dr. Lhatoo and colleagues observed ICA in 17 of 49 (34.7%) seizures and PCCA in 8 of 27 (29.6%) seizures.
Postictal serum serotonin levels were significantly higher than interictal levels for seizures without ICA, but not for seizures with ICA. Among patients with generalized convulsive seizures without PCCA, serum serotonin levels were significantly increased postictally, compared with interictal levels, but not among patients with seizures with PCCA. The change in postictal and interictal serotonin levels also differed significantly between participants with and without PCCA. In patients without PCCA, an increase in serotonin was associated with an increase in heart rate, but not in patients with PCCA.
“Large postictal increases in serum serotonin may play a role in modulation of respiration in these patients,” wrote Dr. Lhatoo and colleagues. “Alternatively, the increase in serum serotonin that we measured may be a surrogate for an increase in brain serotonin levels that may depend on similar physiologic mechanisms, rather than serum serotonin directly stimulating breathing.” Low levels of postictal serum serotonin are associated with potentially harmful breathing phenomena that should be investigated in larger studies, the investigators concluded.
The study was funded by a grant from the National Institutes of Health. One author received a laboratory research grant from Zogenix.
SOURCE: Murugesan A et al. Neurology. 2019 Sep 3. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000008244.
, according to research published online Sept. 4 in Neurology. The change in serotonin level may reflect physiologic changes that protect against harmful processes that promote sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP), the authors wrote.
“Our results give new insight into a possible link between serotonin levels and breathing during and after seizure,” Samden D. Lhatoo, MD, professor of neurology at McGovern Medical School at the University of Texas Health Science Center in Houston, said in a press release. “This may give hope that perhaps someday new therapies could be developed that may help prevent SUDEP. However, our study was small, and much more research is needed to confirm our findings in larger groups before any treatment decisions can be made. It is also important to note that excess serotonin can be harmful, so we strongly recommend against anyone trying to find ways to increase their serotonin levels in response to our study findings.”
Animal and human studies have indicated that breathing dysfunction related to SUDEP may involve serotonergic pathways. Compared with controls, patients with SUDEP have fewer midline serotonergic neurons. Furthermore, a 2018 study suggested an association between severe seizures and decreased serotonergic tone in the postictal state.
Dr. Lhatoo and colleagues examined a prospective cohort of patients with intractable epilepsy to understand the relationship between serum serotonin levels, ictal central apnea (ICA), and postconvulsive central apnea (PCCA). Patients were aged 18 years or older, were admitted to the epilepsy monitoring unit from January 2015 to April 2018, and agreed to take part in an investigation of SUDEP biomarkers. Dr. Lhatoo and colleagues evaluated video EEG, plethysmography, capillary oxygen saturation, and ECG for 49 patients. After a patient had a clinical seizure, the researchers collected postictal and interictal venous blood samples from him or her to measure serum serotonin levels. They classified seizures using the International League Against Epilepsy 2017 seizure classification. Dr. Lhatoo and colleagues analyzed 49 seizures with and without ICA and 27 generalized convulsive seizures with and without PCCA.
Of the 49 patients, 29 were female. Participants’ mean age was 42 years, mean age at epilepsy onset was 25.2 years, and mean epilepsy duration was 16.8 years. The population’s mean body mass index was 28.9. Dr. Lhatoo and colleagues observed ICA in 17 of 49 (34.7%) seizures and PCCA in 8 of 27 (29.6%) seizures.
Postictal serum serotonin levels were significantly higher than interictal levels for seizures without ICA, but not for seizures with ICA. Among patients with generalized convulsive seizures without PCCA, serum serotonin levels were significantly increased postictally, compared with interictal levels, but not among patients with seizures with PCCA. The change in postictal and interictal serotonin levels also differed significantly between participants with and without PCCA. In patients without PCCA, an increase in serotonin was associated with an increase in heart rate, but not in patients with PCCA.
“Large postictal increases in serum serotonin may play a role in modulation of respiration in these patients,” wrote Dr. Lhatoo and colleagues. “Alternatively, the increase in serum serotonin that we measured may be a surrogate for an increase in brain serotonin levels that may depend on similar physiologic mechanisms, rather than serum serotonin directly stimulating breathing.” Low levels of postictal serum serotonin are associated with potentially harmful breathing phenomena that should be investigated in larger studies, the investigators concluded.
The study was funded by a grant from the National Institutes of Health. One author received a laboratory research grant from Zogenix.
SOURCE: Murugesan A et al. Neurology. 2019 Sep 3. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000008244.
, according to research published online Sept. 4 in Neurology. The change in serotonin level may reflect physiologic changes that protect against harmful processes that promote sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP), the authors wrote.
“Our results give new insight into a possible link between serotonin levels and breathing during and after seizure,” Samden D. Lhatoo, MD, professor of neurology at McGovern Medical School at the University of Texas Health Science Center in Houston, said in a press release. “This may give hope that perhaps someday new therapies could be developed that may help prevent SUDEP. However, our study was small, and much more research is needed to confirm our findings in larger groups before any treatment decisions can be made. It is also important to note that excess serotonin can be harmful, so we strongly recommend against anyone trying to find ways to increase their serotonin levels in response to our study findings.”
Animal and human studies have indicated that breathing dysfunction related to SUDEP may involve serotonergic pathways. Compared with controls, patients with SUDEP have fewer midline serotonergic neurons. Furthermore, a 2018 study suggested an association between severe seizures and decreased serotonergic tone in the postictal state.
Dr. Lhatoo and colleagues examined a prospective cohort of patients with intractable epilepsy to understand the relationship between serum serotonin levels, ictal central apnea (ICA), and postconvulsive central apnea (PCCA). Patients were aged 18 years or older, were admitted to the epilepsy monitoring unit from January 2015 to April 2018, and agreed to take part in an investigation of SUDEP biomarkers. Dr. Lhatoo and colleagues evaluated video EEG, plethysmography, capillary oxygen saturation, and ECG for 49 patients. After a patient had a clinical seizure, the researchers collected postictal and interictal venous blood samples from him or her to measure serum serotonin levels. They classified seizures using the International League Against Epilepsy 2017 seizure classification. Dr. Lhatoo and colleagues analyzed 49 seizures with and without ICA and 27 generalized convulsive seizures with and without PCCA.
Of the 49 patients, 29 were female. Participants’ mean age was 42 years, mean age at epilepsy onset was 25.2 years, and mean epilepsy duration was 16.8 years. The population’s mean body mass index was 28.9. Dr. Lhatoo and colleagues observed ICA in 17 of 49 (34.7%) seizures and PCCA in 8 of 27 (29.6%) seizures.
Postictal serum serotonin levels were significantly higher than interictal levels for seizures without ICA, but not for seizures with ICA. Among patients with generalized convulsive seizures without PCCA, serum serotonin levels were significantly increased postictally, compared with interictal levels, but not among patients with seizures with PCCA. The change in postictal and interictal serotonin levels also differed significantly between participants with and without PCCA. In patients without PCCA, an increase in serotonin was associated with an increase in heart rate, but not in patients with PCCA.
“Large postictal increases in serum serotonin may play a role in modulation of respiration in these patients,” wrote Dr. Lhatoo and colleagues. “Alternatively, the increase in serum serotonin that we measured may be a surrogate for an increase in brain serotonin levels that may depend on similar physiologic mechanisms, rather than serum serotonin directly stimulating breathing.” Low levels of postictal serum serotonin are associated with potentially harmful breathing phenomena that should be investigated in larger studies, the investigators concluded.
The study was funded by a grant from the National Institutes of Health. One author received a laboratory research grant from Zogenix.
SOURCE: Murugesan A et al. Neurology. 2019 Sep 3. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000008244.
FROM NEUROLOGY
Key clinical point: Significant increases in serum serotonin after a seizure are associated with lower risk of seizure-related breathing dysfunction.
Major finding: In patients without ictal central apnea, mean interictal serotonin level was 109.1 ng/mL, and postictal levels were 139.8 ng/mL.
Study details: A prospective cohort study of 49 patients with intractable epilepsy.
Disclosures: The study was funded by a grant from the National Institutes of Health. One author received a laboratory research grant from Zogenix.
Source: Murugesan A et al. Neurology. 2019 Sep 3. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000008244.
Combo therapy outcomes for West syndrome prove no better than monotherapy
BANGKOK – Hiroki Nariai, MD, declared at the International Epilepsy Congress.
West syndrome, or infantile spasms with a hypsarrhythmic EEG, is a severe infantile epileptic encephalopathy. It has high morbidity and mortality, and it’s challenging to treat. So neurologists and pediatricians were thrilled by an earlier preliminary report from an open-label, randomized, controlled trial conducted by the International Collaborative Infantile Spasms Study (ICISS) investigators. They reported that a hormonal therapy and vigabatrin (Sabril) combination provided significantly better seizure control between days 14 and 42 of treatment than hormonal therapy alone, albeit at the cost of more side effects (Lancet Neurol. 2017 Jan;16[1]:33-42).
However, a sobering update from the 377-infant study conducted in Australia, Switzerland, Germany, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom concluded that combination therapy didn’t result in improved developmental or epilepsy outcomes at 18 months, Dr. Nariai said at the congress sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy.
“We still have inconclusive evidence to support the routine use of combination therapy. Clearly we need a better disease-modifying therapy because our best results with hormonal therapy or vigabatrin are only a 50%-70% response rate. And having a biomarker to guide early therapy and follow treatment response would help in establishing a better therapy,” commented Dr. Nariai, a pediatric neurologist at the University of California, Los Angeles.
He wasn’t involved in the international trial. He is, however, active in the search for a biomarker that would aid in speedier diagnosis of West syndrome, which in turn would allow for earlier treatment and, potentially, better outcomes. Indeed, Dr. Nariai has done pioneering work in identifying several EEG abnormalities readily measurable noninvasively using scalp electrodes that show considerable promise in this regard. These candidate biomarkers include ictal or interictal high-frequency oscillations at 80 Hz or more, along with cross-frequency coupling of high-frequency oscillations and delta-wave activity.
The primary endpoint in the ICISS study was developmental outcome at 18 months as evaluated using the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales composite score. The mean score was 73.9 in the combination therapy group and closely similar at 72.7 in the children on hormonal therapy alone. At 18 months, 30% of children in the combination therapy group carried a diagnosis of epilepsy, as did 29.2% of controls randomized to either high-dose oral steroids or intramuscular depot tetracosactide. About 15% of children randomized to combination therapy still had spasms at 18 months, as did 15.7% on hormonal therapy alone (Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2018 Oct;2[10]:715-25).
The chief side effects of hormonal therapy included hypertension, hypoglycemia, and immunosuppression. Vigabatrin’s side effects included dose- and duration-dependent peripheral vision loss, movement disorders, and undesirable MRI signal changes.
Dr. Nariai observed that, even though hormonal therapy is widely used as first-line therapy in West syndrome, it remains surrounded by important unanswered questions.
“We don’t have head-to-head comparative studies of ACTH versus high-dose steroids, the optimal dosing protocol is not established, and we really don’t even know the mechanism of action for hormonal therapy and vigabatrin,” he said.
The study was sponsored by the U.K. National Institute of Health Research and other noncommercial entities. Dr. Nariai reported having no financial conflicts regarding his presentation.
BANGKOK – Hiroki Nariai, MD, declared at the International Epilepsy Congress.
West syndrome, or infantile spasms with a hypsarrhythmic EEG, is a severe infantile epileptic encephalopathy. It has high morbidity and mortality, and it’s challenging to treat. So neurologists and pediatricians were thrilled by an earlier preliminary report from an open-label, randomized, controlled trial conducted by the International Collaborative Infantile Spasms Study (ICISS) investigators. They reported that a hormonal therapy and vigabatrin (Sabril) combination provided significantly better seizure control between days 14 and 42 of treatment than hormonal therapy alone, albeit at the cost of more side effects (Lancet Neurol. 2017 Jan;16[1]:33-42).
However, a sobering update from the 377-infant study conducted in Australia, Switzerland, Germany, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom concluded that combination therapy didn’t result in improved developmental or epilepsy outcomes at 18 months, Dr. Nariai said at the congress sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy.
“We still have inconclusive evidence to support the routine use of combination therapy. Clearly we need a better disease-modifying therapy because our best results with hormonal therapy or vigabatrin are only a 50%-70% response rate. And having a biomarker to guide early therapy and follow treatment response would help in establishing a better therapy,” commented Dr. Nariai, a pediatric neurologist at the University of California, Los Angeles.
He wasn’t involved in the international trial. He is, however, active in the search for a biomarker that would aid in speedier diagnosis of West syndrome, which in turn would allow for earlier treatment and, potentially, better outcomes. Indeed, Dr. Nariai has done pioneering work in identifying several EEG abnormalities readily measurable noninvasively using scalp electrodes that show considerable promise in this regard. These candidate biomarkers include ictal or interictal high-frequency oscillations at 80 Hz or more, along with cross-frequency coupling of high-frequency oscillations and delta-wave activity.
The primary endpoint in the ICISS study was developmental outcome at 18 months as evaluated using the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales composite score. The mean score was 73.9 in the combination therapy group and closely similar at 72.7 in the children on hormonal therapy alone. At 18 months, 30% of children in the combination therapy group carried a diagnosis of epilepsy, as did 29.2% of controls randomized to either high-dose oral steroids or intramuscular depot tetracosactide. About 15% of children randomized to combination therapy still had spasms at 18 months, as did 15.7% on hormonal therapy alone (Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2018 Oct;2[10]:715-25).
The chief side effects of hormonal therapy included hypertension, hypoglycemia, and immunosuppression. Vigabatrin’s side effects included dose- and duration-dependent peripheral vision loss, movement disorders, and undesirable MRI signal changes.
Dr. Nariai observed that, even though hormonal therapy is widely used as first-line therapy in West syndrome, it remains surrounded by important unanswered questions.
“We don’t have head-to-head comparative studies of ACTH versus high-dose steroids, the optimal dosing protocol is not established, and we really don’t even know the mechanism of action for hormonal therapy and vigabatrin,” he said.
The study was sponsored by the U.K. National Institute of Health Research and other noncommercial entities. Dr. Nariai reported having no financial conflicts regarding his presentation.
BANGKOK – Hiroki Nariai, MD, declared at the International Epilepsy Congress.
West syndrome, or infantile spasms with a hypsarrhythmic EEG, is a severe infantile epileptic encephalopathy. It has high morbidity and mortality, and it’s challenging to treat. So neurologists and pediatricians were thrilled by an earlier preliminary report from an open-label, randomized, controlled trial conducted by the International Collaborative Infantile Spasms Study (ICISS) investigators. They reported that a hormonal therapy and vigabatrin (Sabril) combination provided significantly better seizure control between days 14 and 42 of treatment than hormonal therapy alone, albeit at the cost of more side effects (Lancet Neurol. 2017 Jan;16[1]:33-42).
However, a sobering update from the 377-infant study conducted in Australia, Switzerland, Germany, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom concluded that combination therapy didn’t result in improved developmental or epilepsy outcomes at 18 months, Dr. Nariai said at the congress sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy.
“We still have inconclusive evidence to support the routine use of combination therapy. Clearly we need a better disease-modifying therapy because our best results with hormonal therapy or vigabatrin are only a 50%-70% response rate. And having a biomarker to guide early therapy and follow treatment response would help in establishing a better therapy,” commented Dr. Nariai, a pediatric neurologist at the University of California, Los Angeles.
He wasn’t involved in the international trial. He is, however, active in the search for a biomarker that would aid in speedier diagnosis of West syndrome, which in turn would allow for earlier treatment and, potentially, better outcomes. Indeed, Dr. Nariai has done pioneering work in identifying several EEG abnormalities readily measurable noninvasively using scalp electrodes that show considerable promise in this regard. These candidate biomarkers include ictal or interictal high-frequency oscillations at 80 Hz or more, along with cross-frequency coupling of high-frequency oscillations and delta-wave activity.
The primary endpoint in the ICISS study was developmental outcome at 18 months as evaluated using the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales composite score. The mean score was 73.9 in the combination therapy group and closely similar at 72.7 in the children on hormonal therapy alone. At 18 months, 30% of children in the combination therapy group carried a diagnosis of epilepsy, as did 29.2% of controls randomized to either high-dose oral steroids or intramuscular depot tetracosactide. About 15% of children randomized to combination therapy still had spasms at 18 months, as did 15.7% on hormonal therapy alone (Lancet Child Adolesc Health. 2018 Oct;2[10]:715-25).
The chief side effects of hormonal therapy included hypertension, hypoglycemia, and immunosuppression. Vigabatrin’s side effects included dose- and duration-dependent peripheral vision loss, movement disorders, and undesirable MRI signal changes.
Dr. Nariai observed that, even though hormonal therapy is widely used as first-line therapy in West syndrome, it remains surrounded by important unanswered questions.
“We don’t have head-to-head comparative studies of ACTH versus high-dose steroids, the optimal dosing protocol is not established, and we really don’t even know the mechanism of action for hormonal therapy and vigabatrin,” he said.
The study was sponsored by the U.K. National Institute of Health Research and other noncommercial entities. Dr. Nariai reported having no financial conflicts regarding his presentation.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM IEC 2019
A new beverage aims to make ketogenic diets more palatable
BANGKOK –
Chief among those shortcomings is the notoriously poor compliance with these highly restrictive diets, which, as defining features, emphasize high fat intake and scrupulous restriction of carbohydrates in an effort to mimic the metabolic effects of starvation, J. Helen Cross, MD, explained at the International Epilepsy Congress.
She was a coauthor of a study led by Natasha E. Schoeler, PhD, a research dietician at the University College London Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, which demonstrated that children and adults with epilepsy who experience a significant antiseizure effect in response to ketogenic diet therapies have higher baseline blood levels of acetyl carnitine (Epilepsia. 2017 May;58(5):893-900).
The importance of this novel observation is twofold: It indicates a potential role for baseline acetyl carnitine level as a predictor of differential response to ketogenic diet therapies, a predictor for which there is an unmet need, and it is consistent with the hypothesis that an important potential mechanism of ketogenic diet effectiveness in epilepsy involves altered mitochondrial energy metabolism. That is because acetyl carnitine plays an essential role in mitochondrial uptake of long-chain fatty acids, noted Dr. Cross, professor of pediatric neurology and head of the developmental neurosciences program at the University College London Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health.
At the congress sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy, Dr. Cross and Dr. Schoeler presented the results of the initial 12-week tolerability study of Betashot, a ready-to-use, palatable blend of specific medium-chain triglycerides designed to be consumed three to four times daily with normal meals, limiting only intake of foods high in refined sugar. The Betashot beverage was developed in conjunction with Vitaflo International, a nutritional products company.
“It actually tastes good. It tastes like a strawberry shake,” according to Dr. Schoeler.
The 12-week study included 35 children with genetically caused forms of epilepsy and 26 adults with drug-resistant epilepsy. This was primarily a tolerability and compliance study, and the main finding was that two-thirds of the children and 69% of adults who started the study were still using Betashot at the 12-week mark. Moreover, 91% of the children and 56% of adults who completed the study elected to stay on Betashot afterwards. By week 12, after titrating their daily dose of Betashot upward as tolerated, the pediatric patients averaged 18% of their total daily energy intake from Betashot, the adults 24%.
The most common reasons for discontinuation among both children and adults were gastrointestinal side effects: abdominal discomfort, diarrhea, and/or vomiting.
“What’s exciting is that, even though the study is not powered to look at seizure response – it’s a tolerability study – we can report that there was a statistically significant reduction in the number of seizures in the group overall after 3 months of treatment,” Dr. Cross said.
She declined to provide specific data on seizure frequency because the study was underpowered for that endpoint. However, she added that further larger studies looking at a possible antiseizure effect of Betashot are ongoing.
The Betashot study was funded by Vitaflo International.
BANGKOK –
Chief among those shortcomings is the notoriously poor compliance with these highly restrictive diets, which, as defining features, emphasize high fat intake and scrupulous restriction of carbohydrates in an effort to mimic the metabolic effects of starvation, J. Helen Cross, MD, explained at the International Epilepsy Congress.
She was a coauthor of a study led by Natasha E. Schoeler, PhD, a research dietician at the University College London Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, which demonstrated that children and adults with epilepsy who experience a significant antiseizure effect in response to ketogenic diet therapies have higher baseline blood levels of acetyl carnitine (Epilepsia. 2017 May;58(5):893-900).
The importance of this novel observation is twofold: It indicates a potential role for baseline acetyl carnitine level as a predictor of differential response to ketogenic diet therapies, a predictor for which there is an unmet need, and it is consistent with the hypothesis that an important potential mechanism of ketogenic diet effectiveness in epilepsy involves altered mitochondrial energy metabolism. That is because acetyl carnitine plays an essential role in mitochondrial uptake of long-chain fatty acids, noted Dr. Cross, professor of pediatric neurology and head of the developmental neurosciences program at the University College London Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health.
At the congress sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy, Dr. Cross and Dr. Schoeler presented the results of the initial 12-week tolerability study of Betashot, a ready-to-use, palatable blend of specific medium-chain triglycerides designed to be consumed three to four times daily with normal meals, limiting only intake of foods high in refined sugar. The Betashot beverage was developed in conjunction with Vitaflo International, a nutritional products company.
“It actually tastes good. It tastes like a strawberry shake,” according to Dr. Schoeler.
The 12-week study included 35 children with genetically caused forms of epilepsy and 26 adults with drug-resistant epilepsy. This was primarily a tolerability and compliance study, and the main finding was that two-thirds of the children and 69% of adults who started the study were still using Betashot at the 12-week mark. Moreover, 91% of the children and 56% of adults who completed the study elected to stay on Betashot afterwards. By week 12, after titrating their daily dose of Betashot upward as tolerated, the pediatric patients averaged 18% of their total daily energy intake from Betashot, the adults 24%.
The most common reasons for discontinuation among both children and adults were gastrointestinal side effects: abdominal discomfort, diarrhea, and/or vomiting.
“What’s exciting is that, even though the study is not powered to look at seizure response – it’s a tolerability study – we can report that there was a statistically significant reduction in the number of seizures in the group overall after 3 months of treatment,” Dr. Cross said.
She declined to provide specific data on seizure frequency because the study was underpowered for that endpoint. However, she added that further larger studies looking at a possible antiseizure effect of Betashot are ongoing.
The Betashot study was funded by Vitaflo International.
BANGKOK –
Chief among those shortcomings is the notoriously poor compliance with these highly restrictive diets, which, as defining features, emphasize high fat intake and scrupulous restriction of carbohydrates in an effort to mimic the metabolic effects of starvation, J. Helen Cross, MD, explained at the International Epilepsy Congress.
She was a coauthor of a study led by Natasha E. Schoeler, PhD, a research dietician at the University College London Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, which demonstrated that children and adults with epilepsy who experience a significant antiseizure effect in response to ketogenic diet therapies have higher baseline blood levels of acetyl carnitine (Epilepsia. 2017 May;58(5):893-900).
The importance of this novel observation is twofold: It indicates a potential role for baseline acetyl carnitine level as a predictor of differential response to ketogenic diet therapies, a predictor for which there is an unmet need, and it is consistent with the hypothesis that an important potential mechanism of ketogenic diet effectiveness in epilepsy involves altered mitochondrial energy metabolism. That is because acetyl carnitine plays an essential role in mitochondrial uptake of long-chain fatty acids, noted Dr. Cross, professor of pediatric neurology and head of the developmental neurosciences program at the University College London Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health.
At the congress sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy, Dr. Cross and Dr. Schoeler presented the results of the initial 12-week tolerability study of Betashot, a ready-to-use, palatable blend of specific medium-chain triglycerides designed to be consumed three to four times daily with normal meals, limiting only intake of foods high in refined sugar. The Betashot beverage was developed in conjunction with Vitaflo International, a nutritional products company.
“It actually tastes good. It tastes like a strawberry shake,” according to Dr. Schoeler.
The 12-week study included 35 children with genetically caused forms of epilepsy and 26 adults with drug-resistant epilepsy. This was primarily a tolerability and compliance study, and the main finding was that two-thirds of the children and 69% of adults who started the study were still using Betashot at the 12-week mark. Moreover, 91% of the children and 56% of adults who completed the study elected to stay on Betashot afterwards. By week 12, after titrating their daily dose of Betashot upward as tolerated, the pediatric patients averaged 18% of their total daily energy intake from Betashot, the adults 24%.
The most common reasons for discontinuation among both children and adults were gastrointestinal side effects: abdominal discomfort, diarrhea, and/or vomiting.
“What’s exciting is that, even though the study is not powered to look at seizure response – it’s a tolerability study – we can report that there was a statistically significant reduction in the number of seizures in the group overall after 3 months of treatment,” Dr. Cross said.
She declined to provide specific data on seizure frequency because the study was underpowered for that endpoint. However, she added that further larger studies looking at a possible antiseizure effect of Betashot are ongoing.
The Betashot study was funded by Vitaflo International.
REPORTING FROM IEC 2019