Effect of Vigabatrin on Sedation and Cognitive Function in Patients with Refractory Epilepsy

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Effect of Vigabatrin on Sedation and Cognitive Function in Patients with Refractory Epilepsy J7ournal ofNeurology, Neurosurgery, and Psychiatry 1993;56:1271-1275 1271 J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry: first published as 10.1136/jnnp.56.12.1271 on 1 December 1993. Downloaded from Effect of vigabatrin on sedation and cognitive function in patients with refractory epilepsy R A Gillham, J Blacklaw, P J W McKee, M J Brodie Abstract Vigabatrin was the first 'designer' drug to be Twenty-four patients with refractory used for the treatment of epilepsy. It is an epilepsy on one or more antiepileptic irreversible suicide inhibitor of y-aminobu- drugs were given additional vigabatrin tyric acid (GABA) transaminase, the enzyme (1 g twice daily for six weeks, followed by responsible for the breakdown of the 1-5 g twice daily for a further six weeks) inhibitory neurotransmitter GABA.1 Thus, it and matched placebo in a double blind, increases the concentration of GABA in the randomised, crossover study. A battery brain. Efficacy trials have been largely con- of neuropsychological tests was adminis- fined to patients with refractory epilepsy tered at baseline and at weeks two, six already receiving other antiepileptic drugs. and 12 of both treatment periods. No sig- Overall, a 50% reduction in frequency of the nificant differences were found between seizures has been reported in around 50% of vigabatrin and placebo at any time point treated patients.24 The benefits were particu- Department of for any of the objective tests of cognitive larly apparent in patients with partial seizures Clinical Psychology, Institute of function. Patients, however, reported a (unpublished observations).5 Good, long term Neurological Sciences, greater degree of sedation after two and efficacy has been reported with the drug over Southern General six weeks on vigabatrin than during the a number of years.f5 Hospital and Epilepsy Research Unit, equivalent placebo phase (p < 0 01), The safety of vigabatrin has come under University although no such difference was appar- particular scrutiny because it produced Department of ent at 12 weeks. Follow up over a mean of intramyelinic oedema in the dog and rat,l617 Medicine and Therapeutics, 14-75 months in 12 responders, who con- although there is no evidence in support of a Western Infirmary, tinued on vigabatrin, revealed a signifi- similar lesion in man.4 '>'9 Vigabatrin is Glasgow, UK cant improvement (all p < 001) on each known to be sedative in some patients, partic- R A Gillham J Blacklaw of three composite scales (three psy- ularly during early treatment.4 Few objective P J W McKee chomotor tests, four memory tests, three data are available on cognitive function, M J Brodie self rating scales) compared with their although one non-randomised, non-blinded Correspondence to: scores during the double blind trial. study with a parallel control group did not Dr M J Brodie, Epilepsy Research Unit, Department Vigabatrin did not cause cognitive support a major deleterious effect with the of Medicine and impairment either acutely or in the long drug.20 In this study, our standard battery of Therapeutics, Western Infirmary, Glasgow GIl term. Phased introduction, however, cognitive function tests21-23 was administered 6NT, United Kingdom seems a prudent policy to allow tolerance to patients with refractory epilepsy who were Received 31 July 1992 and to early subjective sedation. taking part in an add-on, dose ranging, in revised form 15 January 1993. placebo controlled, crossover trial (unpub- Accepted 1 February 1993 (7 Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1993;56: 1271-1275) lished observations). Measures were made in http://jnnp.bmj.com/ the short term and after prolonged adminis- Table 1 Clinical characteristics of24 patients with refractory epilepsy tration of vigabatrin in responders. Age Duration Patient Sex (years) Seizure type (years) Treatment 1 F 24 GTCS 16 CBZ 2 F 53 CPS 43 CBZ Methods 3 M 27 CPS/GTCS 8 CBZ/VPA PATENTS 4 F 38 CPS/GTCS 24 CBZ on September 24, 2021 by guest. Protected copyright. 5 F 24 CPS/GTCS 24 CBZ/PRIM Twenty-four patients (16 women, 8 men; 6 F 17 CPS/GTCS 6 CBZ 7 F 31 CPS 30 CBZ/PRIM aged 17-53 years) with refractory epilepsy 8 F 45 CPS 42 PHT/PB entered the trial (table 1). Fourteen suffered 9 F 46 CPS/GTCS 22 VPA/PB 10 F 27 CPS 20 PHT complex partial seizures with secondary gen- 11 F 36 CPS/GTCS 33 CBZ/VPA eralisation (PSG), eight had complex partial 12 F 34 CPS/GTCS 23 CBZ 13 F 20 CPS/GTCS 9 CBZ/VPA seizures (CPS) alone and two reported only 14 F 32 CPS 30 PHT/PRIM generalised tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS). 15 M 49 CPS 27 CBZ/PRIM 16 M 22 GTCS 20 CBZ/PHT Each averaged at least one seizure per week 17 M 43 CPS/GTCS 8 CBZ/PRIM during the three months before recruitment. 18 M 26 CPS 19 CBZ Eleven patients were being treated with anti- 19 F 24 CPS/GTCS 4 CBZ convulsant monotherapy (nine took carba- 20 M* 26 CPS/GTCS 6 CBZ 21 M* 35 CPS/GTCS 9 CBZ/PHT mazepine, one phenytoin, and one sodium valproate) and the other 13 took two drugs in 22 Mt 44 CPS/GTCS 9 CBZ/PRIM six 23 Ft 27 CPS 7 VPA combination (10 had carbamazepine, 24 Ft 39 CPS/GTCS 36 CBZ primidone, four sodium valproate, four two All Patients excluded from seizure analysis. phenytoin, and phenobarbital). gave tPatients who failed to complete the study. written consent to their participation in the GTCS = generalised tonic-clonic seizures; CPS = complex partial seizures; CBZ = carba- which had the approval of the local mazepine; VPA = sodium valproate; PHT = phenytoin, PRIM = primidone; PB= pheno- trial, barbital. ethical committee. 1272 Gillham, Blacklaw, McKee, Brodie J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry: first published as 10.1136/jnnp.56.12.1271 on 1 December 1993. Downloaded from PROTOCOL level and the task was discontinued when The study was a double blind, randomised, both were failed. crossover, add-on trial of two consecutive The backward digit span measured the doses of vigabatrin and matched placebo. maximum number of digits the patient could After an initial four week run-in, two 12-week recall in reverse order immediately following treatment periods (phase one: six weeks of oral presentation. He or she was allowed two 1 g vigabatrin/matched placebo twice daily; trials at each level and, again, the task was phase two: six weeks of 1-5 g vigabatrin/ discontinued when both were failed. matched placebo twice daily) were separated The paired associate learning test mea- by a four-week washout. Neuropsychological sured the number of trials to reach the crite- testing was performed immediately before rion of three correct answers, when learning each schedule and after two, six and 12 weeks three, unrelated word pairs. of treatment. Patients were given individual In the Rivermead behavioural memory test, appointment times, which were kept constant the 'screen score' of this standardised psycho- throughout the trial. Patients were asked to metric battery was used. take their medication at the same times each day. Seizures were recorded using standard Selfreporting scales description and frequency charts with which The general health questionnaire was the the patients were familiar. At each hospital standard 28 question version, which gave a visit, compliance with medication was 'cut off' point for psychiatric cases. checked by a tablet count. The sedation score assessed the patient's rating of level of alertness using a 10 cm line TEST BAT-tERY where zero was 'wide awake' and 10 'nearly The test battery consisted of measures of ver- asleep'. bal and performance IQ, psychomotor func- The patient was also presented with a list tion, visual attention, memory, and subjective of 10 commonly reported antiepileptic drug side effect rating scales as below: side effects-for example, dizziness, headache, and nausea. He or she rated each Intelligence quotients one on a 10 cm line with 'don't have it' at The verbal IQ was calculated from the score one end and 'very severe' at the other. The on the National Adult Reading Test. The distances from the left hand side of the scales performance IQ was calculated by a standard were measured in centimetres and summated method from the score on Raven's standard to produce a subjective side effect score. progressive matrices. DRUG ASSAYS Psychomotor tests Blood was withdrawn at each review appoint- The decision time was the time in milli- ment for measurement of antiepileptic drug seconds to respond to a light coming on by concentrations. Samples were centrifuged removing the finger from the base button in a immediately and plasma stored at -20° for choice reaction time task. The mean of 30 batch analysis. Vigabatrin was extracted into trials was recorded. The movement time was ethyl acetate from plasma heated with dansyl the time in milliseconds to move the finger chloride to form a fluorescent derivative at from the base button to extinguish a light. high pH and quantified using high pressure http://jnnp.bmj.com/ The mean of 30 trials was recorded. liquid chromatography with phenyl-GABA as In another test, an array of small rectangles the internal standard. The interassay coeffi- was displayed on a visual display unit. After a cient of variation over the range 1-100 mg/l brief period an extra rectangle was added to was 5% and the lower limit of detection was the array. The patient was required to indi- 0 1 mg/l. Concentrations of other anti- cate which it was. The 'threshold' was the epileptic drugs were measured by enzyme minimum time gap in frame units between immunoassay (Emit, Syva, Palo Alto, United the presentation of the array and the addi- States).
Recommended publications
  • Eslicarbazepine Acetate Longer Procedure No
    European Medicines Agency London, 19 February 2009 Doc. Ref.: EMEA/135697/2009 CHMP ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR authorised Exalief International Nonproprietary Name: eslicarbazepine acetate longer Procedure No. EMEA/H/C/000987 no Assessment Report as adopted by the CHMP with all information of a commercially confidential nature deleted. product Medicinal 7 Westferry Circus, Canary Wharf, London, E14 4HB, UK Tel. (44-20) 74 18 84 00 Fax (44-20) 74 18 84 16 E-mail: [email protected] http://www.emea.europa.eu TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE PROCEDURE........................................... 3 1.1. Submission of the dossier ...................................................................................................... 3 1.2. Steps taken for the assessment of the product..................................................................... 3 2. SCIENTIFIC DISCUSSION................................................................................................. 4 2.1. Introduction............................................................................................................................ 4 2.2. Quality aspects ....................................................................................................................... 5 2.3. Non-clinical aspects................................................................................................................ 8 2.4. Clinical aspects....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mechanisms of Action of Antiepileptic Drugs
    Review Mechanisms of action of antiepileptic drugs Epilepsy affects up to 1% of the general population and causes substantial disability. The management of seizures in patients with epilepsy relies heavily on antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Phenobarbital, phenytoin, carbamazepine and valproic acid have been the primary medications used to treat epilepsy for several decades. Since 1993 several AEDs have been approved by the US FDA for use in epilepsy. The choice of the AED is based primarily on the seizure type, spectrum of clinical activity, side effect profile and patient characteristics such as age, comorbidities and concurrent medical treatments. Those AEDs with broad- spectrum activity are often found to exert an action at more than one molecular target. This article will review the proposed mechanisms of action of marketed AEDs in the US and discuss the future of AEDs in development. 1 KEYWORDS: AEDs anticonvulsant drugs antiepileptic drugs epilepsy Aaron M Cook mechanism of action seizures & Meriem K Bensalem-Owen† The therapeutic armamentarium for the treat- patients with refractory seizures. The aim of this 1UK HealthCare, 800 Rose St. H-109, ment of seizures has broadened significantly article is to discuss the past, present and future of Lexington, KY 40536-0293, USA †Author for correspondence: over the past decade [1]. Many of the newer AED pharmacology and mechanisms of action. College of Medicine, Department of anti epileptic drugs (AEDs) have clinical advan- Neurology, University of Kentucky, 800 Rose Street, Room L-455, tages over older, so-called ‘first-generation’ First-generation AEDs Lexington, KY 40536, USA AEDs in that they are more predictable in their Broadly, the mechanisms of action of AEDs can Tel.: +1 859 323 0229 Fax: +1 859 323 5943 dose–response profile and typically are associ- be categorized by their effects on the neuronal [email protected] ated with less drug–drug interactions.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 25 Mechanisms of Action of Antiepileptic Drugs
    Chapter 25 Mechanisms of action of antiepileptic drugs GRAEME J. SILLS Department of Molecular and Clinical Pharmacology, University of Liverpool _________________________________________________________________________ Introduction The serendipitous discovery of the anticonvulsant properties of phenobarbital in 1912 marked the foundation of the modern pharmacotherapy of epilepsy. The subsequent 70 years saw the introduction of phenytoin, ethosuximide, carbamazepine, sodium valproate and a range of benzodiazepines. Collectively, these compounds have come to be regarded as the ‘established’ antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). A concerted period of development of drugs for epilepsy throughout the 1980s and 1990s has resulted (to date) in 16 new agents being licensed as add-on treatment for difficult-to-control adult and/or paediatric epilepsy, with some becoming available as monotherapy for newly diagnosed patients. Together, these have become known as the ‘modern’ AEDs. Throughout this period of unprecedented drug development, there have also been considerable advances in our understanding of how antiepileptic agents exert their effects at the cellular level. AEDs are neither preventive nor curative and are employed solely as a means of controlling symptoms (i.e. suppression of seizures). Recurrent seizure activity is the manifestation of an intermittent and excessive hyperexcitability of the nervous system and, while the pharmacological minutiae of currently marketed AEDs remain to be completely unravelled, these agents essentially redress the balance between neuronal excitation and inhibition. Three major classes of mechanism are recognised: modulation of voltage-gated ion channels; enhancement of gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA)-mediated inhibitory neurotransmission; and attenuation of glutamate-mediated excitatory neurotransmission. The principal pharmacological targets of currently available AEDs are highlighted in Table 1 and discussed further below.
    [Show full text]
  • Anticonvulsants
    Clinical Pharmacy Program Guidelines for Anticonvulsants Program Prior Authorization - Anticonvulsants Medication Aptiom (eslicarbazepine), Briviact (brivaracetam), Fycompa (perampanel), Vimpat (lacosamide), Gabitril (tiagabine), Banzel (rufinamide), Onfi (clobazam), Epidiolex (cannabidiol), Sympazan (clobazam), Sabril, (vigabatrin), Diacomit (stiripentol), Xcopri (cenobamate), Fintepla (fenfluramine) Markets in Scope Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, New York EPP, Pennsylvania- CHIP, Rhode Island, South Carolina Issue Date 6/2016 Pharmacy and 10/2020 Therapeutics Approval Date Effective Date 12/2020 1. Background: Aptiom (eslicarbazepine acetate), Briviact (brivaracetam), Vimpat (lacosamide) and Xcopri are indicated in the treatment of partial-onset seizures. Banzel (rufinamide), Onfi (clobazam), and Sympazan (clobazam) are indicated for the adjunctive treatment of seizures associated with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS). There is some clinical evidence to support the use of clobazam for refractory partial onset seizures. Diacomit (stiripentol) is indicated for seizures associated with Dravet syndrome in patients taking clobazam. Epidiolex (cannabadiol) is indicated for seizures associated with Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, Dravet syndrome or tuberous sclerosis complex. Fintepla (fenfluramine) is indicated for the treatment of seizures associated with Dravet syndrome. Fycompa (perampanel) is indicated for the treatment of partial-onset seizures with or without secondarily generalized seizures and as adjunctive therapy for the treatment of primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures. Gabitril (tiagabine) is indicated ad adjunctive therapy in the treatment of partial-onset seizures. Confidential and Proprietary, © 2020 UnitedHealthcare Services Inc. Sabril (vigabatrin) is indicated as adjunctive therapy for refractory complex partial seizures in patients who have inadequately responded to several alternative treatments and for infantile spasms for whom the potential benefits outweigh the risk of vision loss.
    [Show full text]
  • Center for Drug Evaluation and Research
    CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION AND RESEARCH APPLICATION NUMBER: 22-006 PHARMACOLOGY REVIEW(S) Tertiary Pharmacology Review By: Paul C. Brown, Ph.D., ODE Associate Director for Pharmacology and Toxicology OND IO NDA: 20-427 and 22-006 Submission date: December 28, 2007 (Complete response) Drug: vigabatrin Sponsor: Ovation Pharmaceuticals Indication: 20-427: refractory complex partial seizures in adults 22-006: infantile spasms Reviewing Division: Division of Neurology Products Introductory Comments: The regulatory history of these two NDAs is summarized in the supervisory pharm/tox review. The pharm/tox review of NDA 20-427 found the nonclinical information adequate to support approval. The pharm/tox reviewer for NDA 22-006 did not find the nonclinical information adequate to support approval primarily based on evidence that juvenile animals were sensitive to neurotoxic effects of vigabatrin. The pharm/tox supervisor recognized this concern but did not object to the approval of NDA 22-006 based on the clinical benefit of vigabatrin in infantile spasms which is a serious indication with no other approved therapy. The supervisor recommended that additional studies on the retinal damage and neurotoxicity induced by vigabatrin be conducted as postmarketing requirements. This includes the following studies: 1. A toxicology study in the juvenile rat examining the potential of vigabatrin exposure during development to produce neuronal damage. 2. A juvenile animal toxicology study of vigabatrin in a non-rodent species. 3. A study examining the effect of taurine on vigabatrin-induced retinal damage in rodent. Conclusions: I have discussed these NDAs with the division pharm/tox supervisor and agree that they may be approved from a pharm/tox perspective.
    [Show full text]
  • Shared Care Guideline for Tiagabine (Gabitril®) for Use As Add on Therapy for Partial Seizures in Adults and Children Over 12
    Dorset Medicines Advisory Group SHARED CARE GUIDELINE FOR TIAGABINE (GABITRIL®) FOR USE AS ADD ON THERAPY FOR PARTIAL SEIZURES IN ADULTS AND CHILDREN OVER 12 INDICATION Licensed indications & therapeutic class Tiagabine is an anti-epileptic drug indicated as add-on therapy for partial seizures with or without secondary generalisation where control is not achieved by optimal doses of at least one other anti- epileptic drug. Tiagabine is licensed only for use in adults and children over the age of 12. It is not licensed for monotherapy. NICE CG137: Epilepsies: diagnosis and management (page 26) states: Offer carbamazepine, clobazam, gabapentin, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, sodium valproate or topiramate as adjunctive treatment to children, young people and adults with focal seizures if first-line treatments [carbamazepine or lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine or sodium valoprate] are ineffective or not tolerated. If adjunctive treatment is ineffective or not tolerated, discuss with, or refer to, a tertiary epilepsy specialist. Other AEDs that may be considered by the tertiary epilepsy specialist are eslicarbazepine acetate, lacosamide, phenobarbital, phenytoin, pregabalin, tiagabine, vigabatrin and zonisamide. Carefully consider the risk–benefit ratio when using vigabatrin because of the risk of an irreversible effect on visual fields. NICE also has a “Do not do” recommendation in relation to tiagabine: “Do not offer carbamazepine, gabapentin, oxcarbazepine, phenytoin, pregabalin, tiagabine or vigabatrin as adjunctive treatment in children, young people and adults with childhood absence epilepsy, juvenile absence epilepsy or other absence epilepsy syndromes.” AREAS OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR SHARED CARE Patients should be at the centre of any shared care arrangements. Individual patient information and a record of their preferences should accompany shared care prescribing guidelines, where appropriate.
    [Show full text]
  • Preliminary Report Treatment of Infantile Spasms with Sodium Valproate Followed by Benzodiazepines
    Preliminary Report Treatment of Infantile Spasms with Sodium Valproate followed by Benzodiazepines Narong Auvichayapat MD*, Sompon Tassniyom MD*, Sutthinee Treerotphon MD*, Paradee Auvichayapat MD** * Division of Pediatric Neurology, Department of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen ** Department of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen Objective: To review the result of the infantile spasms’ treatment with sodium valproate followed by nitrazepam or clonazepam. Study design: Descriptive retrospective study. Setting: Srinagarind Hospital, Department of Pediatrics, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand. Material and Method: Twenty-four infantile spasms admitted between January 1994 and December 2003 were analyzed. The inclusion criteria were the patients with infantile spasms clinically diagnosed by the pediatric neurologist, having hypsarrhythmic pattern EEG, and receiving sodium valproate with or without nitrazepam or clonazepam. The patients who had an uncertain diagnosis, incomplete medical record, or that were incompletely followed up were excluded. Data were collected on sex, age at onset of seizure, type of infantile spasms, associated type of seizure, predisposing etiological factor, neuroimaging study, and the result of treatment including cessation of spasms, subsequent development of other seizure types, quantitative reduction of spasms, relapse rates of spasms, psychomotor development, and adverse effects of AEDs. Results: The mean age at onset was 177 days. The male-to-female ratio was 1:1.2. There were 13 cryptogenic (54.2%) and 11 symptomatic (45.8%) infantile spasms. The most common predisposing etiological factors in symptomatic cases were hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy (45.5%) and microcephaly (36.4%), respectively. Ten patients received sodium valproate (41.7%), another 10 received sodium valproate with clonazepam (41.7%), and four received sodium valproate with nitrazepam (16.7%).
    [Show full text]
  • Vigabatrin Associated Visual Field Loss: a Clinical Audit to Study
    Eye (2002) 16, 567–571 2002 Nature Publishing Group All rights reserved 0950-222X/02 $25.00 www.nature.com/eye WD Newman, K Tocher and JF Acheson Vigabatrin associated CLINICAL STUDY visual field loss: a clinical audit to study prevalence, drug history and effects of drug withdrawal Abstract convulsants. We found no evidence of progression or resolution of visual field Purpose To survey clinical visual function defects on discontinuing the drug, and no including quantitative manual perimetry relationship between dose history and visual results in a group of patients taking deficit field loss. An idiosyncratic drug vigabatrin; to assess the severity of any field reaction within the neurosensory retina may defects; to tabulate cumulative and daily underlie the pathogenesis of the visual field doses of medication and to assess possible loss in some patients changes in visual function over time. Eye (2002) 16, 567–571. doi:10.1038/ Method A prevalence study of 100 out of sj.eye.6700168 183 patients currently attending a tertiary referral epilepsy centre who were taking or had recently discontinued vigabatrin Keywords: vigabatrin; visual failure; visual (duration 83–3570 days; mean 1885 days) as fields part of combination anticonvulsant therapy. Complete neuro-ophthalmic examination Introduction including Goldmann kinetic perimetry was performed and monocular mean radial Vigabatrin (Sabril, Hoechst Marion degrees (MRD) to the I/4e isopter calculated. Roussel/Aventis Ltd) was introduced into UK Patients were followed up at 6-monthly clinical practice on a trial basis in the mid- intervals for not less than 18 months. 1980s and granted a licence in 1989.
    [Show full text]
  • 20-427S011 Vigabatrin Clinical BPCA
    CLINICAL REVIEW Application Type NDA Efficacy Supplement Application Number(s) NDA 20427 S-011/S-012 (tablet) NDA 22006 S-012/S-013 (oral solution) Priority or Standard Priority Submit Date(s) April 26, 2013 Received Date(s) April 26, 2013 PDUFA Goal Date October 26, 2013 Division / Office DNP/ ODE 1 Reviewer Name(s) Philip H. Sheridan, M.D. Review Completion Date September 27, 2013 Established Name Vigabatrin (Proposed) Trade Name Sabril Therapeutic Class Anticonvulsant Applicant Lundbeck Inc. Formulation(s) Tablet Sachet for Oral Solution Dosing Regimen BID Indication(s) Complex Partial Seizures Infantile Spasms Intended Population(s) Adult and Pediatric Reference ID: 3396639 Template Version: March 6, 2009 APPEARS THIS WAY ON ORIGINAL Reference ID: 3396639 Clinical Review Philip H. Sheridan, MD NDA 20427 S011/S-012; NDA 22006 S-012/S-013 Sabril (Vigabatrin) Table of Contents 1 RECOMMENDATIONS/RISK BENEFIT ASSESSMENT ......................................... 9 1.1 Recommendation on Regulatory Action ............................................................. 9 1.2 Risk Benefit Assessment .................................................................................... 9 1.4 Recommendations for Postmarket Requirements and Commitments .............. 11 2 INTRODUCTION AND REGULATORY BACKGROUND ...................................... 12 2.1 Product Information .......................................................................................... 12 2.2 Tables of Currently Available Treatments for Proposed Indications ................
    [Show full text]
  • Antiepileptic Drugs for Epilepsy
    Antiepileptic Drugs for Epilepsy EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES After completing this activity, participants should be better able to: 1. Define the difference between a seizure and epilepsy. 2. Identify causes and risk factors associated with epilepsy. 3. Understand the proposed pathophysiology of seizures. 4. Describe the mechanism of action of AEDs used in the management of epilepsy. 5. Assess adverse effects and potential drug-drug interactions associated with the use of AEDs CE EXAM RATIONALE 1. Epilepsy is: A. The most common neurologic disorder worldwide B. A chronic condition in which patients experience recurrent, unprovoked seizures*** C. An isolated event resulting from abnormal electrical disturbances in the brain D. Not classified based on seizure type Correct answer: B Epilepsy is defined as a chronic condition in which patients experience recurrent, unprovoked seizures that range from short-lived intervals of inattention or muscle jerking to severe and elongated convulsions. It is the fourth most common neurologic disorder, affecting approximately 65 million people worldwide. The International Classification of Epileptic Seizures classifies seizures as partial (focal) or generalized. 2. Possible causes of epilepsy and seizures include: A. Stroke B. Head trauma C. Medications such as antidepressants and antipsychotics D. All of the above*** Correct answer: D The cause of epilepsy is idiopathic in origin in approximately half of all patients. However, several medical conditions have an associated risk or causation with epilepsy, including traumatic brain injury (TBI), CNS infections, hypoglycemia, eclampsia, fever, and stroke. In addition, many medications have been associated with precipitating seizures (Table 1). 3. Mechanisms of seizure control include all of the following except: A.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 26 Starting Antiepileptic Drug Treatment
    Chapter 26 Starting antiepileptic drug treatment KHALID HAMANDI Welsh Epilepsy Centre, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff _________________________________________________________________________ The single most important consideration before starting antiepileptic medication is to be secure of the diagnosis of epilepsy based on the clinical history and, where needed, supporting investigations. Antiepileptic drug (AED) treatment should never be started as a trial to ‘test’ the diagnosis; this will only cause problems for you and the patient, and is generally unhelpful in resolving diagnostic uncertainty. Given a likely clinical diagnosis the next questions are when to start treatment, followed by what choice of AED. AEDs should prescribed after a careful evaluation of the risks and benefits of treatment and a discussion with the individual patient about the merits and potential side effects of treatment1. The decision to start medication is a major one – treatment will be for many years, even lifelong, and future withdrawal will bring its own issues around recurrence risk and driving, for instance. The decision to start will depend upon factors such as the risk of recurrence, seizure type, the risk around implication of further seizures, desire to regain a driving licence and, for women, the risks of AEDs and seizures in pregnancy. Antiepileptic medication is normally taken for years, and good adherence is essential to avoid withdrawal seizures. Before starting any medication it is important to give information about side effects, drug interactions, teratogenicity and driving. It is helpful to have to hand one or two of the commonest possible side effects for each AED, to caution the patient about these for any new drug started and to document this clearly in notes and letters.
    [Show full text]
  • Study Protocol SEP093-701
    Titlpage Eslicarbazepine Acetate Clinical Study Protocol SEP093-701 Efficacy and Safety of Eslicarbazepine Acetate as First Add-on to Levetiracetam or Lamotrigine Monotherapy or as Later Adjunctive Treatment for Subjects with Uncontrolled Partial-onset Seizures: A Multicenter, Open-label, Non-randomized Trial IND No. 67,466 Version 3.01 16 November 2017 Incorporating Non-substantial Amendment 1.00 SUNOVION PHARMACEUTICALS INC. 84 Waterford Drive Marlborough, MA 01752, USA (508) 481-6700 Protocol SEP093-701, Version 3.01 Eslicarbazepine acetate RESTRICTED DISTRIBUTION OF PROTOCOLS This protocol and the data gathered during the conduct of this protocol contains information that is confidential and/or of proprietary interest to Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Co. Ltd. and/or Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc. (including their predecessors, subsidiaries or affiliates). The information cannot be disclosed to any third party or used for any purpose other than the purpose for which it is being submitted without the prior written consent of the appropriate Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Company. This information is being provided to you for the purpose of conducting a study for Sunovion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. You may disclose the contents of this protocol to the study personnel under your supervision and to your Institutional Review Board or Independent Ethics Committee for the above purpose. You may not disclose the contents of this protocol to any other parties, unless such disclosure is required by government regulations or laws, without the prior written permission of Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc. Any supplemental information (eg, a protocol amendment) that may be added to this document is also proprietary to Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Inc., and should be handled consistently with that stated above.
    [Show full text]