Search

Purpose: There is a shortfall of suitably powered studies to provide evidence for safe prescribing of AEDs to people with Intellectual Disability (ID). We report clinically useful information on differences in response to Perampanel (PER) adjunctive treatment for refractory epilepsy between ID sub-groups and general population from the UK Ep-ID Research Register., Method: Pooled retrospective case notes data of consented people with epilepsy (PWE) prescribed PER from 6 UK centres was classified as per WHO guidance into groups of moderate -profound ID, mild ID and General population. Demographics, concomitant AEDs, starting and maximum dosage, exposure length, adverse effects, dropout rates, seizure type and frequency were collected. Group differences were reported as odds ratios estimated from univariable logistic regression models., Results: Of the 144 PWE (General population 71, Mild ID 48, Moderate to profound ID 48) examined the association between withdrawal and ID type was marginally statistically significant (p=0.07). Moderate to profound ID PWE were less likely to come off PER compared to mild ID (OR=0.19, CI=0.04-0.92, p=0.04). Differences in mental health side effects by groups was marginally statistically significant (p=0.06). Over 50% seizure improvement was seen in 11% of General population, 24% mild ID and 26% Moderate to profound ID., Conclusions: PER seems safe in PWE with ID. It is better tolerated by PWE with Moderate to profound ID than PWE with higher functioning. Caution is advised when history of mental health problems is present. The standardised approach of the Ep-ID register UK used confirms that responses to AEDs by different ID groups vary between themselves and General population., (Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background and Purpose: About a quarter of people with epilepsy have intellectual disability (ID). This group has communication issues, premature mortality, more treatment resistance, difficulties in making informed choices and greater risks of physical and mental health comorbidities. There is no specific prescribing guidance for this large and vulnerable group. The literature on prescribing for epilepsy in this group was reviewed, in particular examining how antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) work regarding their side effect profiles, effects on specific epilepsy syndromes associated with ID and their individual strengths and weaknesses based on the nature and degree of ID., Method: This is a narrative review for which a comprehensive search was conducted to identify evidence for prescribing commonly used AEDs to people with ID including genetic syndromes specifically associated with epilepsy., Results: A detailed analysis of the results has highlighted the urgent requirement for suitable and reliable evidence in AED prescribing amongst adults with epilepsy and ID as no studies taking account of the response to AEDs of the ID populations based on the WHO Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders criteria of clinical severity of ID were identified., Conclusion: There is a significant shortfall in suitably powered studies to provide sufficient evidence for safe prescribing of AEDs to people with ID., (© 2016 EAN.)