Search

Purpose: We describe the effectiveness of lacosamide as adjunctive therapy in patients with epilepsy and an intellectual disability. This information is relevant, as few data exist pertaining to this population with a high prevalence of (intractable) epilepsy., Methods: We performed a retrospective study in three specialised institutions. Inclusion criteria were (1) focal onset or symptomatic generalized (2) therapy-resistant epilepsy, (3) intellectual disability and (4) residence in a care-facility for people with intellectual disabilities (PWID). The primary outcome variables were the retention rates of lacosamide, estimated through Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Secondary outcomes were reported seizure control, side effects and clinical factors influencing discontinuation., Results: One hundred and thirty-two patients were included. The median retention time of lacosamide in our cohort was four years. The estimated one-, two- and three-year retention rates of lacosamide were 64%, 57% and 56% respectively. Severity of intellectual disability and seizure type did not influence whether lacosamide was continued. In 48.5% of patients, a reduction of seizure activity was reported. Side effects were at least part of the reason for discontinuing treatment in 26.5% of all patients. Common side effects were tiredness/somnolence (in 30.3%), aggression/agitation (24.2%), and instable gait (15.2%). Five deaths during follow-up were considered unlikely to be related to the use of lacosamide. One patient died unexpectedly within two months of treatment onset, probably this was a case of SUDEP., Conclusion: These retention rates of lacosamide in PWID are similar to rates of previously registered anti-epileptic drugs in PWID. Behavioural side effects were noted in a high proportion compared to the general literature on lacosamide. Other side effects were in line with this literature. Lacosamide seems effective and safe for PWID and refractory epilepsy., (Copyright © 2017 British Epilepsy Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To assess the long-term usefulness of 'new anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs)' (lamotrigine, topiramate, levetiracetam, gabapentin and pregabalin) in institutionalized intellectually disabled patients. Information from RCTs is lacking in this population with severe intellectual and behavioural disabilities., Methods: Retrospective study. Data from the medical files and the pharmacy databases of 118 institutionalized intellectually disabled patients who had ever used at least one of the new AEDs were analyzed. The main evaluation parameters were the duration of use (using Kaplan-Meier survival estimates) and the reason for discontinuation (lack of efficacy, occurrence of adverse events, or both) of the new AEDs. Drug continuation was based on the evaluation of treatment results by experienced epileptologists, and not on fixed criteria., Results: New AEDs were generally tried only after a substantial number of other regimens (with classic AEDs) had failed. The most frequently used new AEDs were lamotrigine (68%) and levetiracetam (58%), followed by topiramate (28%) and gabapentin (8%). The 3-year retention rates were 70% (lamotrigine), 52% (levetiracetam), 51% (topiramate) and 33% (gabapentin). Discontinuation due to "lack of efficacy" occurred in 61% (topiramate), 60% (lamotrigine) and 42% (levetiracetam) of the cases. Discontinuation due to adverse events occurred in 42% (levetiracetam), 33% (topiramate) and 28% (lamotrigine)., Conclusions: Treatment of epilepsy with new AEDs was quite often successful in this very therapy-resistant population.

Objectives: Side-effects of anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) may be overlooked in patients with epilepsy in everyday clinical practice. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence and severity of subjective complaints in patients who were considered to be well-controlled and to assess whether these complaints are related to medication, personality traits, or other determinants., Methods: We included patients with epilepsy who were considered to be well-controlled in a cross-sectional study in seven hospitals in the Netherlands. Their medication had not been changed for six months and an apparent reason to change the medication was lacking at the time of enrolment. Subjective complaints were assessed with a 46-item questionnaire. Using multivariable linear regression modeling, we assessed whether patient characteristics, epilepsy characteristics, medication, quality of life (Qolie-10), and personality traits (SCL-90) explained the presence and severity of complaints., Results: Of 173 included patients, 67% reported moderate to severe subjective complaints on the questionnaire. Cognitive complaints were reported most frequently. Multivariate modeling showed that 61% of the variance in reported complaints could be explained by included determinants. The prevalence and severity of complaints was associated with AED polytherapy and higher scores on psycho neuroticism., Conclusions: Patients who were considered to be well-controlled proved to report an unexpectedly high number of subjective complaints. Both medication and aspects of personality contributed to the level of complaints. Our study illustrates that subjective side-effects are easily overlooked in everyday clinical practice, possibly because in practice a generally phrased question is used to detect side-effects.

Background: Few data exist with respect to the occurrence of chronic side effects due to antiepileptic drugs (AED) in routine clinical practice., Objective: To evaluate the prevalence of subjective complaints which patients with epilepsy regard as side effects of their AED treatment in a community-based population., Methods: Cross-sectional study. Subjects were identified through the database of AED-use in the pharmacies in a suburban area in The Netherlands. Respondents completed a brief questionnaire about their epilepsy, including a checklist with 30 complaints, which are common in AED users., Results: We present data of 346 responding adults with treated epilepsy from a population of 107,000 adult inhabitants. Eighty percent was using monotherapy, with few patients taking new AEDs. Almost 60% of the patients reported complaints probably due to side effects in at least three domains. General CNS-related side effects were reported most often; memory problems (21.4% of the patients) and fatigue (20.3%) were dominant. Polytherapy was associated with more side effects than monotherapy. We identified differences in profiles of complaints between valproate, carbamazepine and phenytoin monotherapy. Complaints were not substantially associated with ongoing seizures or other treatment factors., Conclusions: The majority of patients taking AEDs for epilepsy think they have side effects form their drugs, even when seizures were in remission and when monotherapy was used. Our findings suggest a need to improve monitoring of complaints of side effects of AEDs and to explore the feasibility of interventions aimed at reduction of such complaints in everyday clinical practice.