User login
Epilepsy
Functional outcomes of SLAH may be superior to those of open resection
BALTIMORE – , according to data presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. In addition, improvements in functional status are strongly associated with improvements in global cognitive performance.
Previous data have indicated that SLAH results in superior cognitive outcomes, compared with selective and standard open resection, in the treatment of medial temporal lobe epilepsy. The rates of seizure freedom following these procedures are equivalent. Daniel Drane, PhD, associate professor of neurology at Emory University in Atlanta, and colleagues hypothesized that the preservation of cognitive skills following SLAH would be apparent in real-world settings. To test this hypothesis, they investigated changes in functional status following SLAH.
Functional status correlated with neurocognitive change
Dr. Drane and colleagues compared functional outcomes in 53 patients who underwent SLAH at the Emory University Epilepsy Center and 20 patients who underwent open resection at the same center. The investigators created a hierarchical classification of functional status using the following criteria (from best to worst): employed and independent with all activities of daily living (ADLs), unemployed and independent with all ADLs, unemployed and independent with lower ADLs only (i.e., independent with self-care, but not with management of finances, medications, etc.), and unemployed and unable to manage any ADLs without assistance. Dr. Drane and colleagues rated all patients on these criteria at baseline and at 1 year after surgery. They classified patients as improving, declining, or remaining stable in functional status. Finally, the investigators used Fisher’s exact test to compare the proportional ratings of change between surgical procedures.
At baseline, the proportions of patients in each functional group were similar between patients who later underwent SLAH and those who later underwent open resection. Significantly more patients who underwent SLAH, however, had functional improvement, compared with patients who underwent open resection (13.2% vs. 0%). Furthermore, fewer patients who underwent SLAH had functional decline, compared with those who underwent open resection (3.7% vs. 35%).
Dr. Drane and colleagues found a strong correlation between functional status and global ratings of neurocognitive change, but no correlation between functional status and seizure-freedom status. Patients who underwent SLAH were less likely to have a decline in employment status than were patients who underwent open resection were (4.2% vs. 45.4%).
Weighing surgical options for a given patient
“This study provides a real-world metric of meaningful change following surgery, which is, critically, independent of seizure freedom outcome,” said Dr. Drane. “If a patient becomes seizure free but declines in functional status, presumably due to compromised cognitive function, this outcome is likely not going to lead to a better quality of life. Overall, our data suggest that functional status is driven more by cognitive outcome than by seizure freedom, and that it is an equally important metric for determining whether or not surgery has been successful. We would hope that the epilepsy surgical team would try to balance the desire to achieve seizure freedom against the potential risks and benefits of surgery on cognitive performance and functional status.”
Neurologists must consider various factors when deciding whether open resection or SLAH is the better option for a given patient. “Our prior work has shown that SLAH will not cause naming or object recognition deficits, while such deficits will result in a substantial proportion of patients undergoing open resection procedures,” said Dr. Drane. “Declarative memory can seemingly be hurt by either procedure, although it would appear that rates of decline are substantially less following SLAH. As functional status appears to be related to cognitive outcome, SLAH would always be the better choice from the standpoint of risk analysis, particularly since one can almost always go back an complete an open resection at a later date.
“Seizure freedom rates appear to be slightly higher with open resection than with SLAH,” Dr. Drane continued. “This [result] would be the one factor that would represent the one reason to opt for an open resection rather than SLAH. Factors that might push one in this direction could be risk for SUDEP (i.e., someone at very high risk may want to just be done with the seizures) and impaired baseline cognitive functioning (i.e., someone with severely impaired cognitive functioning might be viewed as having less to lose). In the latter case, however, we would caution that low-functioning individuals can sometimes lose their remaining functional abilities even if we cannot do a very good job of measuring cognitive change in such cases due to their poor baseline performance.”
The hemisphere to undergo operation also may influence the choice of procedure. “Some epileptologists will suggest that the choice of using SLAH is more important for patients having surgery involving their language-dominant cerebral hemisphere,” said Dr. Drane. “While postsurgical deficits in these patients are clearly more easy to identify, I would argue that a case can be made for starting with SLAH in the nondominant temporal lobe cases as well. Many of the functions that can be potentially harmed by surgical procedures involving the nondominant (typically right) hemisphere have more subtle effects, but their cumulative impact can yet be harmful.”
The study was partially supported by funding from the National Institutes of Health and Medtronic. The investigators did not report any conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Drane DL et al. AES 2019. Abstract 1.34.
BALTIMORE – , according to data presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. In addition, improvements in functional status are strongly associated with improvements in global cognitive performance.
Previous data have indicated that SLAH results in superior cognitive outcomes, compared with selective and standard open resection, in the treatment of medial temporal lobe epilepsy. The rates of seizure freedom following these procedures are equivalent. Daniel Drane, PhD, associate professor of neurology at Emory University in Atlanta, and colleagues hypothesized that the preservation of cognitive skills following SLAH would be apparent in real-world settings. To test this hypothesis, they investigated changes in functional status following SLAH.
Functional status correlated with neurocognitive change
Dr. Drane and colleagues compared functional outcomes in 53 patients who underwent SLAH at the Emory University Epilepsy Center and 20 patients who underwent open resection at the same center. The investigators created a hierarchical classification of functional status using the following criteria (from best to worst): employed and independent with all activities of daily living (ADLs), unemployed and independent with all ADLs, unemployed and independent with lower ADLs only (i.e., independent with self-care, but not with management of finances, medications, etc.), and unemployed and unable to manage any ADLs without assistance. Dr. Drane and colleagues rated all patients on these criteria at baseline and at 1 year after surgery. They classified patients as improving, declining, or remaining stable in functional status. Finally, the investigators used Fisher’s exact test to compare the proportional ratings of change between surgical procedures.
At baseline, the proportions of patients in each functional group were similar between patients who later underwent SLAH and those who later underwent open resection. Significantly more patients who underwent SLAH, however, had functional improvement, compared with patients who underwent open resection (13.2% vs. 0%). Furthermore, fewer patients who underwent SLAH had functional decline, compared with those who underwent open resection (3.7% vs. 35%).
Dr. Drane and colleagues found a strong correlation between functional status and global ratings of neurocognitive change, but no correlation between functional status and seizure-freedom status. Patients who underwent SLAH were less likely to have a decline in employment status than were patients who underwent open resection were (4.2% vs. 45.4%).
Weighing surgical options for a given patient
“This study provides a real-world metric of meaningful change following surgery, which is, critically, independent of seizure freedom outcome,” said Dr. Drane. “If a patient becomes seizure free but declines in functional status, presumably due to compromised cognitive function, this outcome is likely not going to lead to a better quality of life. Overall, our data suggest that functional status is driven more by cognitive outcome than by seizure freedom, and that it is an equally important metric for determining whether or not surgery has been successful. We would hope that the epilepsy surgical team would try to balance the desire to achieve seizure freedom against the potential risks and benefits of surgery on cognitive performance and functional status.”
Neurologists must consider various factors when deciding whether open resection or SLAH is the better option for a given patient. “Our prior work has shown that SLAH will not cause naming or object recognition deficits, while such deficits will result in a substantial proportion of patients undergoing open resection procedures,” said Dr. Drane. “Declarative memory can seemingly be hurt by either procedure, although it would appear that rates of decline are substantially less following SLAH. As functional status appears to be related to cognitive outcome, SLAH would always be the better choice from the standpoint of risk analysis, particularly since one can almost always go back an complete an open resection at a later date.
“Seizure freedom rates appear to be slightly higher with open resection than with SLAH,” Dr. Drane continued. “This [result] would be the one factor that would represent the one reason to opt for an open resection rather than SLAH. Factors that might push one in this direction could be risk for SUDEP (i.e., someone at very high risk may want to just be done with the seizures) and impaired baseline cognitive functioning (i.e., someone with severely impaired cognitive functioning might be viewed as having less to lose). In the latter case, however, we would caution that low-functioning individuals can sometimes lose their remaining functional abilities even if we cannot do a very good job of measuring cognitive change in such cases due to their poor baseline performance.”
The hemisphere to undergo operation also may influence the choice of procedure. “Some epileptologists will suggest that the choice of using SLAH is more important for patients having surgery involving their language-dominant cerebral hemisphere,” said Dr. Drane. “While postsurgical deficits in these patients are clearly more easy to identify, I would argue that a case can be made for starting with SLAH in the nondominant temporal lobe cases as well. Many of the functions that can be potentially harmed by surgical procedures involving the nondominant (typically right) hemisphere have more subtle effects, but their cumulative impact can yet be harmful.”
The study was partially supported by funding from the National Institutes of Health and Medtronic. The investigators did not report any conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Drane DL et al. AES 2019. Abstract 1.34.
BALTIMORE – , according to data presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. In addition, improvements in functional status are strongly associated with improvements in global cognitive performance.
Previous data have indicated that SLAH results in superior cognitive outcomes, compared with selective and standard open resection, in the treatment of medial temporal lobe epilepsy. The rates of seizure freedom following these procedures are equivalent. Daniel Drane, PhD, associate professor of neurology at Emory University in Atlanta, and colleagues hypothesized that the preservation of cognitive skills following SLAH would be apparent in real-world settings. To test this hypothesis, they investigated changes in functional status following SLAH.
Functional status correlated with neurocognitive change
Dr. Drane and colleagues compared functional outcomes in 53 patients who underwent SLAH at the Emory University Epilepsy Center and 20 patients who underwent open resection at the same center. The investigators created a hierarchical classification of functional status using the following criteria (from best to worst): employed and independent with all activities of daily living (ADLs), unemployed and independent with all ADLs, unemployed and independent with lower ADLs only (i.e., independent with self-care, but not with management of finances, medications, etc.), and unemployed and unable to manage any ADLs without assistance. Dr. Drane and colleagues rated all patients on these criteria at baseline and at 1 year after surgery. They classified patients as improving, declining, or remaining stable in functional status. Finally, the investigators used Fisher’s exact test to compare the proportional ratings of change between surgical procedures.
At baseline, the proportions of patients in each functional group were similar between patients who later underwent SLAH and those who later underwent open resection. Significantly more patients who underwent SLAH, however, had functional improvement, compared with patients who underwent open resection (13.2% vs. 0%). Furthermore, fewer patients who underwent SLAH had functional decline, compared with those who underwent open resection (3.7% vs. 35%).
Dr. Drane and colleagues found a strong correlation between functional status and global ratings of neurocognitive change, but no correlation between functional status and seizure-freedom status. Patients who underwent SLAH were less likely to have a decline in employment status than were patients who underwent open resection were (4.2% vs. 45.4%).
Weighing surgical options for a given patient
“This study provides a real-world metric of meaningful change following surgery, which is, critically, independent of seizure freedom outcome,” said Dr. Drane. “If a patient becomes seizure free but declines in functional status, presumably due to compromised cognitive function, this outcome is likely not going to lead to a better quality of life. Overall, our data suggest that functional status is driven more by cognitive outcome than by seizure freedom, and that it is an equally important metric for determining whether or not surgery has been successful. We would hope that the epilepsy surgical team would try to balance the desire to achieve seizure freedom against the potential risks and benefits of surgery on cognitive performance and functional status.”
Neurologists must consider various factors when deciding whether open resection or SLAH is the better option for a given patient. “Our prior work has shown that SLAH will not cause naming or object recognition deficits, while such deficits will result in a substantial proportion of patients undergoing open resection procedures,” said Dr. Drane. “Declarative memory can seemingly be hurt by either procedure, although it would appear that rates of decline are substantially less following SLAH. As functional status appears to be related to cognitive outcome, SLAH would always be the better choice from the standpoint of risk analysis, particularly since one can almost always go back an complete an open resection at a later date.
“Seizure freedom rates appear to be slightly higher with open resection than with SLAH,” Dr. Drane continued. “This [result] would be the one factor that would represent the one reason to opt for an open resection rather than SLAH. Factors that might push one in this direction could be risk for SUDEP (i.e., someone at very high risk may want to just be done with the seizures) and impaired baseline cognitive functioning (i.e., someone with severely impaired cognitive functioning might be viewed as having less to lose). In the latter case, however, we would caution that low-functioning individuals can sometimes lose their remaining functional abilities even if we cannot do a very good job of measuring cognitive change in such cases due to their poor baseline performance.”
The hemisphere to undergo operation also may influence the choice of procedure. “Some epileptologists will suggest that the choice of using SLAH is more important for patients having surgery involving their language-dominant cerebral hemisphere,” said Dr. Drane. “While postsurgical deficits in these patients are clearly more easy to identify, I would argue that a case can be made for starting with SLAH in the nondominant temporal lobe cases as well. Many of the functions that can be potentially harmed by surgical procedures involving the nondominant (typically right) hemisphere have more subtle effects, but their cumulative impact can yet be harmful.”
The study was partially supported by funding from the National Institutes of Health and Medtronic. The investigators did not report any conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Drane DL et al. AES 2019. Abstract 1.34.
REPORTING FROM AES 2019
EEG abnormalities may indicate increased risk for epilepsy in patients with autism
BALTIMORE – , according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. In addition, a positive family history of febrile seizures also is associated with an increased risk of epilepsy in this population.
The literature suggests that the prevalence of epilepsy in patients with ASD ranges from 5% to 40%. This broad range may result from the heterogeneity of epilepsy risk factors among patients with ASD. These risk factors include intellectual disability, age, and syndromic forms of ASD such as tuberous sclerosis complex. Regardless of whether they have epilepsy, approximately 60% of patients with ASD have EEG abnormalities. The prognostic implications of these abnormalities are uncertain.
Investigators reviewed patients’ charts retrospectively
Divya Nadkarni, MD, a neurologist at Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles, and colleagues sought to clarify the relationship between risk factors such as EEG abnormalities and subsequent epilepsy in patients with ASD. They retrospectively identified patients who were followed jointly at UCLA and at Pediatric Minds, a neurodevelopmental clinic in Torrance, Calif. Eligible patients had a diagnosis of ASD, based on criteria from DSM-IV, DSM-5, or the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule. In addition, patients had overnight, continuous video EEG evaluation and a minimum follow-up of 1 week after EEG. Patients with a history of epilepsy before the initial EEG evaluation were excluded. Dr. Nadkarni and colleagues collected clinical and electrographic data by chart review.
The study’s primary outcome was time to onset of epilepsy. Among the variables that the investigators analyzed were EEG abnormalities, which they defined as focal slowing or generalized or focal epileptiform discharges. The other variables were history of febrile seizures, family history of epilepsy, family history of febrile seizures, and family history of ASD. Dr. Nadkarni and colleagues analyzed the data using the Kaplan–Meier method and Cox proportional hazards models.
In all, 164 patients met the study’s inclusion criteria. The population’s median age at the initial EEG evaluation was 4.5 years. The median follow-up after this evaluation was 2.4 years. The investigators found 63 patients (38.4%) with abnormal EEGs, and 18 patients (11%) subsequently developed epilepsy after a median of 1.9 years.
Family history of febrile seizures was associated with time to epilepsy onset
The time to epilepsy onset was associated with abnormalities on the initial overnight continuous EEG. The hazard ratio of epilepsy among patients with EEG abnormalities was 8.0. Approximately one-third of patients with EEG abnormalities developed subsequent epilepsy, compared with approximately 5% of patients without EEG abnormalities, said Dr. Nadkarni.
In addition, time to epilepsy onset was independently associated with a positive family history of febrile seizures. This finding was unexpected, said Dr. Nadkarni. The hazard ratio of epilepsy among patients with a positive family history of febrile seizures was 12.6.
The patient’s own history of febrile seizures was not associated with time to epilepsy onset. One potential explanation for this result is that it is difficult to distinguish between febrile seizure and seizure with fever in the general pediatric population. Making this distinction in children with ASD, who may have atypical febrile seizures, might be still more difficult, said Dr. Nadkarni.
Time for guideline updates?
“Statements from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Neurology, and the Child Neurology Society do not currently recommend routine EEG screening for all children with ASD,” said Dr. Nadkarni. Investigators are suggesting that the guidelines should be reevaluated, however. “Research shows that EEG abnormalities, particularly epileptiform abnormalities, are associated with worse outcome, in terms of developmental and adaptive functioning. EEG endophenotypes in ASD are starting to be elucidated ... That’s one reason to consider EEG screening.” Furthermore, preliminary connectivity research suggests that EEG screening of high-risk siblings of children with ASD may predict the development of ASD.
The small cohort and retrospective design were among the study’s limitations, said Dr. Nadkarni. Some patients were lost to follow-up, and some data were missing from patients’ charts.
“In our opinion, further study – ideally, a prospective, observational cohort study – might be warranted to determine whether overnight continuous EEG monitoring might be useful as a screening tool for epilepsy in patients with ASD,” Dr. Nadkarni concluded.
The study was conducted without external funding, and the investigators had no disclosures.
SOURCE: Nadkarni D et al. AES 2019. Abstract 1.29.
BALTIMORE – , according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. In addition, a positive family history of febrile seizures also is associated with an increased risk of epilepsy in this population.
The literature suggests that the prevalence of epilepsy in patients with ASD ranges from 5% to 40%. This broad range may result from the heterogeneity of epilepsy risk factors among patients with ASD. These risk factors include intellectual disability, age, and syndromic forms of ASD such as tuberous sclerosis complex. Regardless of whether they have epilepsy, approximately 60% of patients with ASD have EEG abnormalities. The prognostic implications of these abnormalities are uncertain.
Investigators reviewed patients’ charts retrospectively
Divya Nadkarni, MD, a neurologist at Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles, and colleagues sought to clarify the relationship between risk factors such as EEG abnormalities and subsequent epilepsy in patients with ASD. They retrospectively identified patients who were followed jointly at UCLA and at Pediatric Minds, a neurodevelopmental clinic in Torrance, Calif. Eligible patients had a diagnosis of ASD, based on criteria from DSM-IV, DSM-5, or the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule. In addition, patients had overnight, continuous video EEG evaluation and a minimum follow-up of 1 week after EEG. Patients with a history of epilepsy before the initial EEG evaluation were excluded. Dr. Nadkarni and colleagues collected clinical and electrographic data by chart review.
The study’s primary outcome was time to onset of epilepsy. Among the variables that the investigators analyzed were EEG abnormalities, which they defined as focal slowing or generalized or focal epileptiform discharges. The other variables were history of febrile seizures, family history of epilepsy, family history of febrile seizures, and family history of ASD. Dr. Nadkarni and colleagues analyzed the data using the Kaplan–Meier method and Cox proportional hazards models.
In all, 164 patients met the study’s inclusion criteria. The population’s median age at the initial EEG evaluation was 4.5 years. The median follow-up after this evaluation was 2.4 years. The investigators found 63 patients (38.4%) with abnormal EEGs, and 18 patients (11%) subsequently developed epilepsy after a median of 1.9 years.
Family history of febrile seizures was associated with time to epilepsy onset
The time to epilepsy onset was associated with abnormalities on the initial overnight continuous EEG. The hazard ratio of epilepsy among patients with EEG abnormalities was 8.0. Approximately one-third of patients with EEG abnormalities developed subsequent epilepsy, compared with approximately 5% of patients without EEG abnormalities, said Dr. Nadkarni.
In addition, time to epilepsy onset was independently associated with a positive family history of febrile seizures. This finding was unexpected, said Dr. Nadkarni. The hazard ratio of epilepsy among patients with a positive family history of febrile seizures was 12.6.
The patient’s own history of febrile seizures was not associated with time to epilepsy onset. One potential explanation for this result is that it is difficult to distinguish between febrile seizure and seizure with fever in the general pediatric population. Making this distinction in children with ASD, who may have atypical febrile seizures, might be still more difficult, said Dr. Nadkarni.
Time for guideline updates?
“Statements from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Neurology, and the Child Neurology Society do not currently recommend routine EEG screening for all children with ASD,” said Dr. Nadkarni. Investigators are suggesting that the guidelines should be reevaluated, however. “Research shows that EEG abnormalities, particularly epileptiform abnormalities, are associated with worse outcome, in terms of developmental and adaptive functioning. EEG endophenotypes in ASD are starting to be elucidated ... That’s one reason to consider EEG screening.” Furthermore, preliminary connectivity research suggests that EEG screening of high-risk siblings of children with ASD may predict the development of ASD.
The small cohort and retrospective design were among the study’s limitations, said Dr. Nadkarni. Some patients were lost to follow-up, and some data were missing from patients’ charts.
“In our opinion, further study – ideally, a prospective, observational cohort study – might be warranted to determine whether overnight continuous EEG monitoring might be useful as a screening tool for epilepsy in patients with ASD,” Dr. Nadkarni concluded.
The study was conducted without external funding, and the investigators had no disclosures.
SOURCE: Nadkarni D et al. AES 2019. Abstract 1.29.
BALTIMORE – , according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. In addition, a positive family history of febrile seizures also is associated with an increased risk of epilepsy in this population.
The literature suggests that the prevalence of epilepsy in patients with ASD ranges from 5% to 40%. This broad range may result from the heterogeneity of epilepsy risk factors among patients with ASD. These risk factors include intellectual disability, age, and syndromic forms of ASD such as tuberous sclerosis complex. Regardless of whether they have epilepsy, approximately 60% of patients with ASD have EEG abnormalities. The prognostic implications of these abnormalities are uncertain.
Investigators reviewed patients’ charts retrospectively
Divya Nadkarni, MD, a neurologist at Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles, and colleagues sought to clarify the relationship between risk factors such as EEG abnormalities and subsequent epilepsy in patients with ASD. They retrospectively identified patients who were followed jointly at UCLA and at Pediatric Minds, a neurodevelopmental clinic in Torrance, Calif. Eligible patients had a diagnosis of ASD, based on criteria from DSM-IV, DSM-5, or the Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule. In addition, patients had overnight, continuous video EEG evaluation and a minimum follow-up of 1 week after EEG. Patients with a history of epilepsy before the initial EEG evaluation were excluded. Dr. Nadkarni and colleagues collected clinical and electrographic data by chart review.
The study’s primary outcome was time to onset of epilepsy. Among the variables that the investigators analyzed were EEG abnormalities, which they defined as focal slowing or generalized or focal epileptiform discharges. The other variables were history of febrile seizures, family history of epilepsy, family history of febrile seizures, and family history of ASD. Dr. Nadkarni and colleagues analyzed the data using the Kaplan–Meier method and Cox proportional hazards models.
In all, 164 patients met the study’s inclusion criteria. The population’s median age at the initial EEG evaluation was 4.5 years. The median follow-up after this evaluation was 2.4 years. The investigators found 63 patients (38.4%) with abnormal EEGs, and 18 patients (11%) subsequently developed epilepsy after a median of 1.9 years.
Family history of febrile seizures was associated with time to epilepsy onset
The time to epilepsy onset was associated with abnormalities on the initial overnight continuous EEG. The hazard ratio of epilepsy among patients with EEG abnormalities was 8.0. Approximately one-third of patients with EEG abnormalities developed subsequent epilepsy, compared with approximately 5% of patients without EEG abnormalities, said Dr. Nadkarni.
In addition, time to epilepsy onset was independently associated with a positive family history of febrile seizures. This finding was unexpected, said Dr. Nadkarni. The hazard ratio of epilepsy among patients with a positive family history of febrile seizures was 12.6.
The patient’s own history of febrile seizures was not associated with time to epilepsy onset. One potential explanation for this result is that it is difficult to distinguish between febrile seizure and seizure with fever in the general pediatric population. Making this distinction in children with ASD, who may have atypical febrile seizures, might be still more difficult, said Dr. Nadkarni.
Time for guideline updates?
“Statements from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Neurology, and the Child Neurology Society do not currently recommend routine EEG screening for all children with ASD,” said Dr. Nadkarni. Investigators are suggesting that the guidelines should be reevaluated, however. “Research shows that EEG abnormalities, particularly epileptiform abnormalities, are associated with worse outcome, in terms of developmental and adaptive functioning. EEG endophenotypes in ASD are starting to be elucidated ... That’s one reason to consider EEG screening.” Furthermore, preliminary connectivity research suggests that EEG screening of high-risk siblings of children with ASD may predict the development of ASD.
The small cohort and retrospective design were among the study’s limitations, said Dr. Nadkarni. Some patients were lost to follow-up, and some data were missing from patients’ charts.
“In our opinion, further study – ideally, a prospective, observational cohort study – might be warranted to determine whether overnight continuous EEG monitoring might be useful as a screening tool for epilepsy in patients with ASD,” Dr. Nadkarni concluded.
The study was conducted without external funding, and the investigators had no disclosures.
SOURCE: Nadkarni D et al. AES 2019. Abstract 1.29.
REPORTING FROM AES 2019
Hippocampal sparing temporal lobectomy recommended for medically refractory epilepsy
BALTIMORE – according to a review from researchers at Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia.
Often, the hippocampus and other mesial structures are removed even if they appear normal. The concern is that even normal looking tissue could harbor epileptogenic elements and leaving them in tact could reduce postoperative seizure control, explained senior investigator and neurologist Michael Sperling, MD, director of the Jefferson Comprehensive Epilepsy Center.
He and his colleagues wanted to see if that was really true, so they compared outcomes in 21 patients who had mesial-sparing lobectomies with 19 patients who had the standard approach. Cases and controls were matched for age, preoperative seizure frequency, side of surgery, and other factors. None of the patients had MTS.
There was no significant difference in postoperative seizure recurrence between the two groups (P = .974). The standard procedure had a slight edge early on, but at 2.5 years, just over 60% of patients in both groups were seizure free. At 5 years, about 50% were seizure free, and almost 40% in both arms at 7.5 years.
About two-thirds of patients in each arm had pre- and postoperative verbal memory testing, with similar duration from surgery to postop evaluation. There was no change among the hippocampus-sparing patients, but a roughly one standard deviation drop in delayed recall and logical memory on the California Verbal Learning Test in the standard group.
Even so, it wasn’t enough to affect employment, which the investigators used as a surrogate for disability; postoperative employment was comparable in both groups. People mostly retained their jobs, and there was no difference in job loss. A few people in each arm actually found jobs after surgery.
The investigators concluded that “it is reasonable to recommend mesial temporal sparing procedure in patients with dominant neocortical temporal lobe epilepsy when the hippocampus appears normal in the MRI. However, as resecting the mesial temporal structures was not associated with a greater chance of becoming unemployed following the surgery, there appears to be no major contraindication to performing an [anterior temporal lobectomy] if clinically warranted.”
The results are reassuring. “My bias walking in was that” seizure recurrence would be worse after hippocampal-sparing surgery. “I was pleased to see that it was about the same. If you want to try to preserve verbal memory and the MRI is normal, you can get away with sparing the mesial temporal structures, and still get a good seizure outcome,” Dr. Sperling said at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society, where the study was presented.
“But if you have to take the hippocampus for whatever reason, the functional consequence of a decline in verbal memory is not severe enough as to be disabling,” which is “one of the big concerns” with temporal lobectomy, he said.
The findings “will make us more likely to recommend mesial-sparing surgery, but at the same time” perhaps not be quite as worried about disability with the standard approach.
Temporal lobe epilepsy with normal mesial structures isn’t very common, which explains the small numbers in the series. It’s possible subtle difference in seizure control and employment outcomes would have been found with a larger series, “but obviously there were no major differences. I think the fundamental questions have been answered to my satisfaction,” Dr. Sperling said.
Overall, “it’s better to operate and try to cure people than to worry that you will make their memory worse when the consequences of having uncontrolled epilepsy is a higher death rate,” he said.
There were about equal numbers of men and women in the review; patients were in their early 30s, on average; and most had left-sided surgery. Just over half in each arm had preoperative tonic-clonic seizures. The mean duration of epilepsy was 14.9 years in the mesial-sparing group, and 8.6 years in the standard arm.
There was no funding for the review, and Dr. Sperling didn’t have any relevant disclosures.
SOURCE: Goldstein L et al. AES 2019. Abstract 1.339.
BALTIMORE – according to a review from researchers at Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia.
Often, the hippocampus and other mesial structures are removed even if they appear normal. The concern is that even normal looking tissue could harbor epileptogenic elements and leaving them in tact could reduce postoperative seizure control, explained senior investigator and neurologist Michael Sperling, MD, director of the Jefferson Comprehensive Epilepsy Center.
He and his colleagues wanted to see if that was really true, so they compared outcomes in 21 patients who had mesial-sparing lobectomies with 19 patients who had the standard approach. Cases and controls were matched for age, preoperative seizure frequency, side of surgery, and other factors. None of the patients had MTS.
There was no significant difference in postoperative seizure recurrence between the two groups (P = .974). The standard procedure had a slight edge early on, but at 2.5 years, just over 60% of patients in both groups were seizure free. At 5 years, about 50% were seizure free, and almost 40% in both arms at 7.5 years.
About two-thirds of patients in each arm had pre- and postoperative verbal memory testing, with similar duration from surgery to postop evaluation. There was no change among the hippocampus-sparing patients, but a roughly one standard deviation drop in delayed recall and logical memory on the California Verbal Learning Test in the standard group.
Even so, it wasn’t enough to affect employment, which the investigators used as a surrogate for disability; postoperative employment was comparable in both groups. People mostly retained their jobs, and there was no difference in job loss. A few people in each arm actually found jobs after surgery.
The investigators concluded that “it is reasonable to recommend mesial temporal sparing procedure in patients with dominant neocortical temporal lobe epilepsy when the hippocampus appears normal in the MRI. However, as resecting the mesial temporal structures was not associated with a greater chance of becoming unemployed following the surgery, there appears to be no major contraindication to performing an [anterior temporal lobectomy] if clinically warranted.”
The results are reassuring. “My bias walking in was that” seizure recurrence would be worse after hippocampal-sparing surgery. “I was pleased to see that it was about the same. If you want to try to preserve verbal memory and the MRI is normal, you can get away with sparing the mesial temporal structures, and still get a good seizure outcome,” Dr. Sperling said at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society, where the study was presented.
“But if you have to take the hippocampus for whatever reason, the functional consequence of a decline in verbal memory is not severe enough as to be disabling,” which is “one of the big concerns” with temporal lobectomy, he said.
The findings “will make us more likely to recommend mesial-sparing surgery, but at the same time” perhaps not be quite as worried about disability with the standard approach.
Temporal lobe epilepsy with normal mesial structures isn’t very common, which explains the small numbers in the series. It’s possible subtle difference in seizure control and employment outcomes would have been found with a larger series, “but obviously there were no major differences. I think the fundamental questions have been answered to my satisfaction,” Dr. Sperling said.
Overall, “it’s better to operate and try to cure people than to worry that you will make their memory worse when the consequences of having uncontrolled epilepsy is a higher death rate,” he said.
There were about equal numbers of men and women in the review; patients were in their early 30s, on average; and most had left-sided surgery. Just over half in each arm had preoperative tonic-clonic seizures. The mean duration of epilepsy was 14.9 years in the mesial-sparing group, and 8.6 years in the standard arm.
There was no funding for the review, and Dr. Sperling didn’t have any relevant disclosures.
SOURCE: Goldstein L et al. AES 2019. Abstract 1.339.
BALTIMORE – according to a review from researchers at Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia.
Often, the hippocampus and other mesial structures are removed even if they appear normal. The concern is that even normal looking tissue could harbor epileptogenic elements and leaving them in tact could reduce postoperative seizure control, explained senior investigator and neurologist Michael Sperling, MD, director of the Jefferson Comprehensive Epilepsy Center.
He and his colleagues wanted to see if that was really true, so they compared outcomes in 21 patients who had mesial-sparing lobectomies with 19 patients who had the standard approach. Cases and controls were matched for age, preoperative seizure frequency, side of surgery, and other factors. None of the patients had MTS.
There was no significant difference in postoperative seizure recurrence between the two groups (P = .974). The standard procedure had a slight edge early on, but at 2.5 years, just over 60% of patients in both groups were seizure free. At 5 years, about 50% were seizure free, and almost 40% in both arms at 7.5 years.
About two-thirds of patients in each arm had pre- and postoperative verbal memory testing, with similar duration from surgery to postop evaluation. There was no change among the hippocampus-sparing patients, but a roughly one standard deviation drop in delayed recall and logical memory on the California Verbal Learning Test in the standard group.
Even so, it wasn’t enough to affect employment, which the investigators used as a surrogate for disability; postoperative employment was comparable in both groups. People mostly retained their jobs, and there was no difference in job loss. A few people in each arm actually found jobs after surgery.
The investigators concluded that “it is reasonable to recommend mesial temporal sparing procedure in patients with dominant neocortical temporal lobe epilepsy when the hippocampus appears normal in the MRI. However, as resecting the mesial temporal structures was not associated with a greater chance of becoming unemployed following the surgery, there appears to be no major contraindication to performing an [anterior temporal lobectomy] if clinically warranted.”
The results are reassuring. “My bias walking in was that” seizure recurrence would be worse after hippocampal-sparing surgery. “I was pleased to see that it was about the same. If you want to try to preserve verbal memory and the MRI is normal, you can get away with sparing the mesial temporal structures, and still get a good seizure outcome,” Dr. Sperling said at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society, where the study was presented.
“But if you have to take the hippocampus for whatever reason, the functional consequence of a decline in verbal memory is not severe enough as to be disabling,” which is “one of the big concerns” with temporal lobectomy, he said.
The findings “will make us more likely to recommend mesial-sparing surgery, but at the same time” perhaps not be quite as worried about disability with the standard approach.
Temporal lobe epilepsy with normal mesial structures isn’t very common, which explains the small numbers in the series. It’s possible subtle difference in seizure control and employment outcomes would have been found with a larger series, “but obviously there were no major differences. I think the fundamental questions have been answered to my satisfaction,” Dr. Sperling said.
Overall, “it’s better to operate and try to cure people than to worry that you will make their memory worse when the consequences of having uncontrolled epilepsy is a higher death rate,” he said.
There were about equal numbers of men and women in the review; patients were in their early 30s, on average; and most had left-sided surgery. Just over half in each arm had preoperative tonic-clonic seizures. The mean duration of epilepsy was 14.9 years in the mesial-sparing group, and 8.6 years in the standard arm.
There was no funding for the review, and Dr. Sperling didn’t have any relevant disclosures.
SOURCE: Goldstein L et al. AES 2019. Abstract 1.339.
REPORTING FROM AES 2019
Should a normal-appearing hippocampus be resected in a patient with temporal lobe epilepsy?
BALTIMORE – according to an analysis presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. Long-term seizure outcomes, however, are similar between resected and nonresected patients. In addition, sparing a normal-appearing hippocampus is correlated with a lower risk of verbal deficits, but long-term outcomes are unclear.
Neurologists have not arrived at a consensus about the best surgical management of patients with temporal lobe epilepsy and a hippocampus that appears normal on MRI. Few studies have examined seizure and neuropsychologic outcomes in this population, and this scarcity of data makes counseling patients difficult.
A review of data for surgical patients
To investigate this question, Marcia E. Morita-Sherman, MD, from the Cleveland Clinic, and colleagues retrospectively reviewed data for 152 patients who underwent surgery for temporal lobe epilepsy at the Cleveland Clinic during 2010-2018. Eligible participants were older than 16 years, and the researchers excluded patients with MRI or pathologic signs of hippocampal sclerosis and those with prior surgeries from the analysis.
To examine neuropsychological outcomes, Dr. Morita-Sherman and colleagues compared measures of verbal memory, visual memory, and confrontation naming that had been obtained before surgery and at 6 months after surgery. They measured hippocampal volume using Neuroquant. They categorized resections as dominant or nondominant according to patients’ handedness or language lateralization. The investigators classified 74 patients as having a spared hippocampus and 78 patients as having a resected hippocampus. They classified neuropsychological outcomes as showing decline or no decline using epilepsy-specific reliable change indexes.
Type of surgery affected memory and naming
Approximately 40% of patients had seizure recurrence within 1 year after surgery, and 63% had seizure recurrence within 6 years after surgery. The rate of invasive EEG was similar between patients with a spared hippocampus (50%) and those with a resected hippocampus (47%). In a univariate analysis, male sex, longer epilepsy duration, normal MRI, history of invasive evaluation, and acute postoperative seizures were associated with a higher risk of seizure recurrence. Patients with a spared hippocampus had a higher risk of early seizure recurrence, compared with patients with a resected hippocampus, but the difference was not statistically significant. Long-term seizure outcomes were similar between the two groups.
Neuropsychological outcomes were available for 86 patients. Among 56 patients who underwent surgery on the dominant side, those with spared-hippocampal surgery, compared with those with resected-hippocampal surgery, had lower rates of clinically meaningful declines in verbal memory (39.7% vs. 70.4%) and naming (40.7% vs. 79.2%). The investigators found no significant difference in the 30 patients with nondominant surgeries.
“Sparing the hippocampus in a tailored temporal lobe resection doesn’t necessarily prevent any memory decline. Close to 40% of our patients where the hippocampus was spared had a clinically significant memory loss,” said Lara E. Jehi, MD, an epileptologist at the Cleveland Clinic and one of the investigators. “Including the hippocampus in the resection seems to correlate with better odds of seizure freedom, at least in the short term. We need more research to study the long-term memory and naming implications of hippocampal sparing versus resection.”
The study was funded by a grant from the National Institutes of Health. The investigators reported no conflicts of interest. [email protected]
SOURCE: Morita-Sherman ME et al. AES 2019, Abstract 1.336.
BALTIMORE – according to an analysis presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. Long-term seizure outcomes, however, are similar between resected and nonresected patients. In addition, sparing a normal-appearing hippocampus is correlated with a lower risk of verbal deficits, but long-term outcomes are unclear.
Neurologists have not arrived at a consensus about the best surgical management of patients with temporal lobe epilepsy and a hippocampus that appears normal on MRI. Few studies have examined seizure and neuropsychologic outcomes in this population, and this scarcity of data makes counseling patients difficult.
A review of data for surgical patients
To investigate this question, Marcia E. Morita-Sherman, MD, from the Cleveland Clinic, and colleagues retrospectively reviewed data for 152 patients who underwent surgery for temporal lobe epilepsy at the Cleveland Clinic during 2010-2018. Eligible participants were older than 16 years, and the researchers excluded patients with MRI or pathologic signs of hippocampal sclerosis and those with prior surgeries from the analysis.
To examine neuropsychological outcomes, Dr. Morita-Sherman and colleagues compared measures of verbal memory, visual memory, and confrontation naming that had been obtained before surgery and at 6 months after surgery. They measured hippocampal volume using Neuroquant. They categorized resections as dominant or nondominant according to patients’ handedness or language lateralization. The investigators classified 74 patients as having a spared hippocampus and 78 patients as having a resected hippocampus. They classified neuropsychological outcomes as showing decline or no decline using epilepsy-specific reliable change indexes.
Type of surgery affected memory and naming
Approximately 40% of patients had seizure recurrence within 1 year after surgery, and 63% had seizure recurrence within 6 years after surgery. The rate of invasive EEG was similar between patients with a spared hippocampus (50%) and those with a resected hippocampus (47%). In a univariate analysis, male sex, longer epilepsy duration, normal MRI, history of invasive evaluation, and acute postoperative seizures were associated with a higher risk of seizure recurrence. Patients with a spared hippocampus had a higher risk of early seizure recurrence, compared with patients with a resected hippocampus, but the difference was not statistically significant. Long-term seizure outcomes were similar between the two groups.
Neuropsychological outcomes were available for 86 patients. Among 56 patients who underwent surgery on the dominant side, those with spared-hippocampal surgery, compared with those with resected-hippocampal surgery, had lower rates of clinically meaningful declines in verbal memory (39.7% vs. 70.4%) and naming (40.7% vs. 79.2%). The investigators found no significant difference in the 30 patients with nondominant surgeries.
“Sparing the hippocampus in a tailored temporal lobe resection doesn’t necessarily prevent any memory decline. Close to 40% of our patients where the hippocampus was spared had a clinically significant memory loss,” said Lara E. Jehi, MD, an epileptologist at the Cleveland Clinic and one of the investigators. “Including the hippocampus in the resection seems to correlate with better odds of seizure freedom, at least in the short term. We need more research to study the long-term memory and naming implications of hippocampal sparing versus resection.”
The study was funded by a grant from the National Institutes of Health. The investigators reported no conflicts of interest. [email protected]
SOURCE: Morita-Sherman ME et al. AES 2019, Abstract 1.336.
BALTIMORE – according to an analysis presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. Long-term seizure outcomes, however, are similar between resected and nonresected patients. In addition, sparing a normal-appearing hippocampus is correlated with a lower risk of verbal deficits, but long-term outcomes are unclear.
Neurologists have not arrived at a consensus about the best surgical management of patients with temporal lobe epilepsy and a hippocampus that appears normal on MRI. Few studies have examined seizure and neuropsychologic outcomes in this population, and this scarcity of data makes counseling patients difficult.
A review of data for surgical patients
To investigate this question, Marcia E. Morita-Sherman, MD, from the Cleveland Clinic, and colleagues retrospectively reviewed data for 152 patients who underwent surgery for temporal lobe epilepsy at the Cleveland Clinic during 2010-2018. Eligible participants were older than 16 years, and the researchers excluded patients with MRI or pathologic signs of hippocampal sclerosis and those with prior surgeries from the analysis.
To examine neuropsychological outcomes, Dr. Morita-Sherman and colleagues compared measures of verbal memory, visual memory, and confrontation naming that had been obtained before surgery and at 6 months after surgery. They measured hippocampal volume using Neuroquant. They categorized resections as dominant or nondominant according to patients’ handedness or language lateralization. The investigators classified 74 patients as having a spared hippocampus and 78 patients as having a resected hippocampus. They classified neuropsychological outcomes as showing decline or no decline using epilepsy-specific reliable change indexes.
Type of surgery affected memory and naming
Approximately 40% of patients had seizure recurrence within 1 year after surgery, and 63% had seizure recurrence within 6 years after surgery. The rate of invasive EEG was similar between patients with a spared hippocampus (50%) and those with a resected hippocampus (47%). In a univariate analysis, male sex, longer epilepsy duration, normal MRI, history of invasive evaluation, and acute postoperative seizures were associated with a higher risk of seizure recurrence. Patients with a spared hippocampus had a higher risk of early seizure recurrence, compared with patients with a resected hippocampus, but the difference was not statistically significant. Long-term seizure outcomes were similar between the two groups.
Neuropsychological outcomes were available for 86 patients. Among 56 patients who underwent surgery on the dominant side, those with spared-hippocampal surgery, compared with those with resected-hippocampal surgery, had lower rates of clinically meaningful declines in verbal memory (39.7% vs. 70.4%) and naming (40.7% vs. 79.2%). The investigators found no significant difference in the 30 patients with nondominant surgeries.
“Sparing the hippocampus in a tailored temporal lobe resection doesn’t necessarily prevent any memory decline. Close to 40% of our patients where the hippocampus was spared had a clinically significant memory loss,” said Lara E. Jehi, MD, an epileptologist at the Cleveland Clinic and one of the investigators. “Including the hippocampus in the resection seems to correlate with better odds of seizure freedom, at least in the short term. We need more research to study the long-term memory and naming implications of hippocampal sparing versus resection.”
The study was funded by a grant from the National Institutes of Health. The investigators reported no conflicts of interest. [email protected]
SOURCE: Morita-Sherman ME et al. AES 2019, Abstract 1.336.
REPORTING FROM AES 2019
Comorbidity rates remain stable over 10 years in childhood-onset epilepsy
BALTIMORE – , according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. Compared with controls, however, young adults with childhood-onset epilepsy have higher rates of psychiatric comorbidity.
The findings suggest that “diagnoses that are identified at baseline continue to be a problem over time,” said Jana E. Jones, PhD, associate professor of neuropsychology at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. Although neurologists understand that comorbidities are common among patients with childhood-onset epilepsy, “it would be good for us to continue to learn what factors are influencing this,” she added.
Investigators sought predictors of outcomes at 10 years
Since 2004, Dr. Jones and her colleagues at the University of Wisconsin have been conducting a study of patients with childhood-onset epilepsy. After the population had completed 10 years of follow-up, the researchers analyzed the data to identify potential patterns of medical and psychiatric comorbidities. One question that they sought to answer was whether any baseline factors could predict outcomes at 10 years.
The researchers analyzed data for 53 patients with childhood-onset epilepsy and 55 controls without epilepsy. At baseline, participants were between ages 8 years and 18 years and had no intellectual disability or neurologic impairment. Within 1 year of epilepsy diagnosis, each participant underwent a psychiatric interview based on the Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (K-SADS). Ten years later, participants underwent the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), a psychiatric interview for adults. Information about medical comorbidities was collected through interviews and record review at baseline and through an online survey at the 10-year follow-up.
Participants’ mean age at baseline was 12 years. Mean IQ was 105 for the epilepsy group and 109 for the control group. At 10 years, participants’ mean age was about 23 years. Among patients with epilepsy, 55% had focal epilepsy, and 42% had generalized epilepsy. About 40% of participants with epilepsy were in remission at 10 years, which Dr. Jones and colleagues defined as having achieved 5 years without taking medications and without having seizures. At 10 years after diagnosis, 51% of patients with epilepsy were not taking any seizure medication, including approximately 11% of patients with epilepsy who were not categorized as in remission. Most patients taking medication were on monotherapy.
Trends in psychiatric and medical comorbidities
At baseline, approximately 75% of children with epilepsy had a psychiatric or medical diagnosis, compared with 40% of controls. At the 10-year follow-up, 62% of children with epilepsy had a psychiatric diagnosis, compared with 35% of controls. Among controls, 4% had a medical comorbidity (i.e., asthma) alone at baseline. Asthma was the most common medical comorbidity at baseline among patients with epilepsy, and other comorbidities included sleep disorder, head injury, and scoliosis. Six percent of patients had a medical comorbidity alone at baseline. The proportion of patients with both psychiatric and medical comorbidity was 8% at baseline. Patients with epilepsy at baseline had an increased risk of psychiatric comorbidity.
At 10 years, the most common medical comorbidity among patients with epilepsy was head injury (18.9%), followed by allergies and asthma. The rate of migraine was about 13% among controls and slightly less in the epilepsy group. Dr. Jones and colleagues found no significant differences in medical comorbidities between groups at 10 years. At that point, the rate of medical comorbidity was 4% among patients and 11% among controls.
The rate of psychiatric comorbidity remained relatively stable over 10 years, said Dr. Jones. Approximately 47% of patients with epilepsy had a psychiatric diagnosis at 10 years, compared with 29% of controls. In addition, 38% of patients with epilepsy had both psychiatric and medical diagnoses, compared with 29% of controls. Epilepsy increased the risk of psychiatric comorbidity at the 10-year follow-up. Neither medications, remission status, nor seizure type predicted any comorbidity at 10 years.
Dr. Jones and colleagues compared comorbidity rates between the study sample and the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R), which reported population-based data that included an epilepsy sample. About 47% of the epilepsy group had an anxiety disorder, compared with 40.7% in the NCS-R. The rate of anxiety disorders was higher in the control group (45.5%) than in the control group (30.8%) in the NCS-R. Approximately 26.4% of the population in Dr. Jones’s study had a mood disorder, compared with 25.9% in the National Comorbidity Survey.
Dr. Jones and colleagues are conducting 15-year follow-up of their original population. One question they will examine is whether medical comorbidities will increase in patients with childhood-onset epilepsy as they approach age 30 years.
Two of the investigators received funding in the form of a grant from the National Institutes of Health.
SOURCE: Kesselmayer RF et al. AES 2019. Abstract 1.288.
BALTIMORE – , according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. Compared with controls, however, young adults with childhood-onset epilepsy have higher rates of psychiatric comorbidity.
The findings suggest that “diagnoses that are identified at baseline continue to be a problem over time,” said Jana E. Jones, PhD, associate professor of neuropsychology at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. Although neurologists understand that comorbidities are common among patients with childhood-onset epilepsy, “it would be good for us to continue to learn what factors are influencing this,” she added.
Investigators sought predictors of outcomes at 10 years
Since 2004, Dr. Jones and her colleagues at the University of Wisconsin have been conducting a study of patients with childhood-onset epilepsy. After the population had completed 10 years of follow-up, the researchers analyzed the data to identify potential patterns of medical and psychiatric comorbidities. One question that they sought to answer was whether any baseline factors could predict outcomes at 10 years.
The researchers analyzed data for 53 patients with childhood-onset epilepsy and 55 controls without epilepsy. At baseline, participants were between ages 8 years and 18 years and had no intellectual disability or neurologic impairment. Within 1 year of epilepsy diagnosis, each participant underwent a psychiatric interview based on the Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (K-SADS). Ten years later, participants underwent the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), a psychiatric interview for adults. Information about medical comorbidities was collected through interviews and record review at baseline and through an online survey at the 10-year follow-up.
Participants’ mean age at baseline was 12 years. Mean IQ was 105 for the epilepsy group and 109 for the control group. At 10 years, participants’ mean age was about 23 years. Among patients with epilepsy, 55% had focal epilepsy, and 42% had generalized epilepsy. About 40% of participants with epilepsy were in remission at 10 years, which Dr. Jones and colleagues defined as having achieved 5 years without taking medications and without having seizures. At 10 years after diagnosis, 51% of patients with epilepsy were not taking any seizure medication, including approximately 11% of patients with epilepsy who were not categorized as in remission. Most patients taking medication were on monotherapy.
Trends in psychiatric and medical comorbidities
At baseline, approximately 75% of children with epilepsy had a psychiatric or medical diagnosis, compared with 40% of controls. At the 10-year follow-up, 62% of children with epilepsy had a psychiatric diagnosis, compared with 35% of controls. Among controls, 4% had a medical comorbidity (i.e., asthma) alone at baseline. Asthma was the most common medical comorbidity at baseline among patients with epilepsy, and other comorbidities included sleep disorder, head injury, and scoliosis. Six percent of patients had a medical comorbidity alone at baseline. The proportion of patients with both psychiatric and medical comorbidity was 8% at baseline. Patients with epilepsy at baseline had an increased risk of psychiatric comorbidity.
At 10 years, the most common medical comorbidity among patients with epilepsy was head injury (18.9%), followed by allergies and asthma. The rate of migraine was about 13% among controls and slightly less in the epilepsy group. Dr. Jones and colleagues found no significant differences in medical comorbidities between groups at 10 years. At that point, the rate of medical comorbidity was 4% among patients and 11% among controls.
The rate of psychiatric comorbidity remained relatively stable over 10 years, said Dr. Jones. Approximately 47% of patients with epilepsy had a psychiatric diagnosis at 10 years, compared with 29% of controls. In addition, 38% of patients with epilepsy had both psychiatric and medical diagnoses, compared with 29% of controls. Epilepsy increased the risk of psychiatric comorbidity at the 10-year follow-up. Neither medications, remission status, nor seizure type predicted any comorbidity at 10 years.
Dr. Jones and colleagues compared comorbidity rates between the study sample and the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R), which reported population-based data that included an epilepsy sample. About 47% of the epilepsy group had an anxiety disorder, compared with 40.7% in the NCS-R. The rate of anxiety disorders was higher in the control group (45.5%) than in the control group (30.8%) in the NCS-R. Approximately 26.4% of the population in Dr. Jones’s study had a mood disorder, compared with 25.9% in the National Comorbidity Survey.
Dr. Jones and colleagues are conducting 15-year follow-up of their original population. One question they will examine is whether medical comorbidities will increase in patients with childhood-onset epilepsy as they approach age 30 years.
Two of the investigators received funding in the form of a grant from the National Institutes of Health.
SOURCE: Kesselmayer RF et al. AES 2019. Abstract 1.288.
BALTIMORE – , according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. Compared with controls, however, young adults with childhood-onset epilepsy have higher rates of psychiatric comorbidity.
The findings suggest that “diagnoses that are identified at baseline continue to be a problem over time,” said Jana E. Jones, PhD, associate professor of neuropsychology at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. Although neurologists understand that comorbidities are common among patients with childhood-onset epilepsy, “it would be good for us to continue to learn what factors are influencing this,” she added.
Investigators sought predictors of outcomes at 10 years
Since 2004, Dr. Jones and her colleagues at the University of Wisconsin have been conducting a study of patients with childhood-onset epilepsy. After the population had completed 10 years of follow-up, the researchers analyzed the data to identify potential patterns of medical and psychiatric comorbidities. One question that they sought to answer was whether any baseline factors could predict outcomes at 10 years.
The researchers analyzed data for 53 patients with childhood-onset epilepsy and 55 controls without epilepsy. At baseline, participants were between ages 8 years and 18 years and had no intellectual disability or neurologic impairment. Within 1 year of epilepsy diagnosis, each participant underwent a psychiatric interview based on the Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (K-SADS). Ten years later, participants underwent the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), a psychiatric interview for adults. Information about medical comorbidities was collected through interviews and record review at baseline and through an online survey at the 10-year follow-up.
Participants’ mean age at baseline was 12 years. Mean IQ was 105 for the epilepsy group and 109 for the control group. At 10 years, participants’ mean age was about 23 years. Among patients with epilepsy, 55% had focal epilepsy, and 42% had generalized epilepsy. About 40% of participants with epilepsy were in remission at 10 years, which Dr. Jones and colleagues defined as having achieved 5 years without taking medications and without having seizures. At 10 years after diagnosis, 51% of patients with epilepsy were not taking any seizure medication, including approximately 11% of patients with epilepsy who were not categorized as in remission. Most patients taking medication were on monotherapy.
Trends in psychiatric and medical comorbidities
At baseline, approximately 75% of children with epilepsy had a psychiatric or medical diagnosis, compared with 40% of controls. At the 10-year follow-up, 62% of children with epilepsy had a psychiatric diagnosis, compared with 35% of controls. Among controls, 4% had a medical comorbidity (i.e., asthma) alone at baseline. Asthma was the most common medical comorbidity at baseline among patients with epilepsy, and other comorbidities included sleep disorder, head injury, and scoliosis. Six percent of patients had a medical comorbidity alone at baseline. The proportion of patients with both psychiatric and medical comorbidity was 8% at baseline. Patients with epilepsy at baseline had an increased risk of psychiatric comorbidity.
At 10 years, the most common medical comorbidity among patients with epilepsy was head injury (18.9%), followed by allergies and asthma. The rate of migraine was about 13% among controls and slightly less in the epilepsy group. Dr. Jones and colleagues found no significant differences in medical comorbidities between groups at 10 years. At that point, the rate of medical comorbidity was 4% among patients and 11% among controls.
The rate of psychiatric comorbidity remained relatively stable over 10 years, said Dr. Jones. Approximately 47% of patients with epilepsy had a psychiatric diagnosis at 10 years, compared with 29% of controls. In addition, 38% of patients with epilepsy had both psychiatric and medical diagnoses, compared with 29% of controls. Epilepsy increased the risk of psychiatric comorbidity at the 10-year follow-up. Neither medications, remission status, nor seizure type predicted any comorbidity at 10 years.
Dr. Jones and colleagues compared comorbidity rates between the study sample and the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R), which reported population-based data that included an epilepsy sample. About 47% of the epilepsy group had an anxiety disorder, compared with 40.7% in the NCS-R. The rate of anxiety disorders was higher in the control group (45.5%) than in the control group (30.8%) in the NCS-R. Approximately 26.4% of the population in Dr. Jones’s study had a mood disorder, compared with 25.9% in the National Comorbidity Survey.
Dr. Jones and colleagues are conducting 15-year follow-up of their original population. One question they will examine is whether medical comorbidities will increase in patients with childhood-onset epilepsy as they approach age 30 years.
Two of the investigators received funding in the form of a grant from the National Institutes of Health.
SOURCE: Kesselmayer RF et al. AES 2019. Abstract 1.288.
REPORTING FROM AES 2019
FDA approves diazepam nasal spray for seizure clusters
The drug may be administered by a care partner outside of a medical setting for the treatment of intermittent, stereotypic episodes of frequent seizure activity that are distinct from a patient’s usual seizure pattern. The formulation is the first nasal spray approved by the FDA as a rescue treatment for people with epilepsy aged 6 years and older, according to Neurelis, the developer of the drug. Midazolam nasal spray, approved in May 2019, is indicated for patients with epilepsy aged 12 years and older.
Investigators evaluated the safety of diazepam nasal spray in a long-term, open-label, repeat-dose, clinical trial. The study enrolled 130 patients aged 6 years and older; more than 2,000 seizures were treated. The drug generally was safe and well tolerated, and the most common adverse reactions were somnolence, headache, and nasal discomfort.
The FDA has granted Valtoco 7 years of orphan drug exclusivity. In the United States, about 170,000 patients with epilepsy are at risk of cluster or acute repetitive seizures, the company said. Until recently, approved rescue medications had been rectally administered.
Patients may receive a second dose of diazepam nasal spray at least 4 hours after an initial dose if needed, but caregivers should not use more than two doses to treat a single episode, according to the prescribing information. In addition, the prescribing information recommends that diazepam nasal spray be used for no more than one episode every 5 days and no more than five episodes per month.
The drug may be administered by a care partner outside of a medical setting for the treatment of intermittent, stereotypic episodes of frequent seizure activity that are distinct from a patient’s usual seizure pattern. The formulation is the first nasal spray approved by the FDA as a rescue treatment for people with epilepsy aged 6 years and older, according to Neurelis, the developer of the drug. Midazolam nasal spray, approved in May 2019, is indicated for patients with epilepsy aged 12 years and older.
Investigators evaluated the safety of diazepam nasal spray in a long-term, open-label, repeat-dose, clinical trial. The study enrolled 130 patients aged 6 years and older; more than 2,000 seizures were treated. The drug generally was safe and well tolerated, and the most common adverse reactions were somnolence, headache, and nasal discomfort.
The FDA has granted Valtoco 7 years of orphan drug exclusivity. In the United States, about 170,000 patients with epilepsy are at risk of cluster or acute repetitive seizures, the company said. Until recently, approved rescue medications had been rectally administered.
Patients may receive a second dose of diazepam nasal spray at least 4 hours after an initial dose if needed, but caregivers should not use more than two doses to treat a single episode, according to the prescribing information. In addition, the prescribing information recommends that diazepam nasal spray be used for no more than one episode every 5 days and no more than five episodes per month.
The drug may be administered by a care partner outside of a medical setting for the treatment of intermittent, stereotypic episodes of frequent seizure activity that are distinct from a patient’s usual seizure pattern. The formulation is the first nasal spray approved by the FDA as a rescue treatment for people with epilepsy aged 6 years and older, according to Neurelis, the developer of the drug. Midazolam nasal spray, approved in May 2019, is indicated for patients with epilepsy aged 12 years and older.
Investigators evaluated the safety of diazepam nasal spray in a long-term, open-label, repeat-dose, clinical trial. The study enrolled 130 patients aged 6 years and older; more than 2,000 seizures were treated. The drug generally was safe and well tolerated, and the most common adverse reactions were somnolence, headache, and nasal discomfort.
The FDA has granted Valtoco 7 years of orphan drug exclusivity. In the United States, about 170,000 patients with epilepsy are at risk of cluster or acute repetitive seizures, the company said. Until recently, approved rescue medications had been rectally administered.
Patients may receive a second dose of diazepam nasal spray at least 4 hours after an initial dose if needed, but caregivers should not use more than two doses to treat a single episode, according to the prescribing information. In addition, the prescribing information recommends that diazepam nasal spray be used for no more than one episode every 5 days and no more than five episodes per month.
AED exposure from breastfeeding appears to be low
, according to a study published online ahead of print Dec. 30, 2019, in JAMA Neurology. The results may explain why previous research failed to find adverse neurodevelopmental effects of breastfeeding in infants whose mothers are undergoing AED treatment, said the authors.
“The results of this study add support to the general safety of breastfeeding by mothers with epilepsy who take AEDs,” wrote Angela K. Birnbaum, PhD, professor of experimental and clinical pharmacology at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, and colleagues.
Investigators measured infants’ blood AED concentrations
To date, medical consensus about the safety of breastfeeding while the mother is taking AEDs has been elusive. Researchers have investigated breast milk concentrations of AEDs as surrogate markers of AED concentrations in children. Breast milk concentrations, however, do not account for differences in infant pharmacokinetic processes and thus could misrepresent AED exposure in children through breastfeeding.
Dr. Birnbaum and colleagues sought to measure blood concentrations of AEDs in mothers with epilepsy and the infants that they breastfed to achieve an objective measure of AED exposure through breastfeeding. They examined data collected from December 2012 to October 2016 in the prospective Maternal Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs (MONEAD) study. Eligible participants were pregnant women with epilepsy between the ages of 14 and 45 years whose pregnancies had progressed to fewer than 20 weeks’ gestational age and who had IQ scores greater than 70 points. Participants were followed up throughout pregnancy and for 9 months post partum. Children were enrolled at birth.
The investigators collected blood samples from mothers and infants who were breastfed at the same visit, which occurred at between 5 and 20 weeks after birth. The volume of ingested breast milk delivered through graduated feeding bottles each day and the total duration of all daily breastfeeding sessions were recorded. For infants, blood samples were collected from the plantar surface of the heel and stored as dried blood spots on filter paper. The study’s primary endpoint was the percentage of infant-to-mother concentration of AEDs. Concentrations of AEDs in infants at less than the lower limit of quantification were assessed as half of the lower limit.
Exposure in utero may be greater than exposure through breast milk
In all, the researchers enrolled 351 pregnant women with epilepsy into the study and collected data on 345 infants. Two hundred twenty-two (64.3%) of the infants were breastfed, and 146 (42.3%) had AED concentrations available. After excluding outliers and mothers with missing concentration data, Dr. Birnbaum and colleagues included 164 matching infant-mother concentration pairs in their analysis (i.e., of 135 mothers and 138 infants). Approximately 52% of the infants were female, and their median age at blood collection was 13 weeks. The mothers’ median age was 32 years. About 82% of mothers were receiving monotherapy. The investigators found no demographic differences between groups of mothers taking various AEDs.
Sixty-eight infants (49.3%) had AED concentrations that were less than the lower limit of quantification. AED concentration was not greater than the lower limit of quantification for any infants breastfed by mothers taking carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine, valproic acid, or topiramate. Most levetiracetam (71.4%) and zonisamide (60.0%) concentrations in infants were less than the lower limit of quantification. Most lamotrigine concentrations in infants (88.6%) were greater than the lower limit of quantification.
The median percentage of infant-to-mother concentration was 28.9% for lamotrigine, 5.3% for levetiracetam, 44.2% for zonisamide, 5.7% for carbamazepine, 5.4% for carbamazepine epoxide, 0.3% for oxcarbazepine, 17.2% for topiramate, and 21.4% for valproic acid. Multiple linear regression models indicated that maternal concentration was significantly associated with lamotrigine concentration in infants, but not levetiracetam concentration in infants.
“Prior studies at delivery demonstrated that umbilical-cord concentrations were nearly equal to maternal concentrations, suggesting extensive placental passage to the fetus,” wrote Dr. Birnbaum and colleagues. “Therefore, the amount of AED exposure via breast milk is likely substantially lower than fetal exposure during pregnancy and appears unlikely to confer any additional risks beyond those that might be associated with exposure in pregnancy, especially given prior studies showing no adverse neurodevelopmental effects of breastfeeding while taking AEDs.”
The investigators acknowledged several limitations of their research, including the observational design of the MONEAD study. The amount of AED in participants’ breast milk is unknown, and the investigators could not calculate relative infant dosages. Only one blood sample was taken per infant, thus the results may not reflect infants’ total exposure over time.
The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and the National Institute of Child Health and Development funded the research. The authors reported receiving research support from various pharmaceutical companies.
SOURCE: Birnbaum AK et al. JAMA Neurol. 2019 Dec 30. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.4443.
, according to a study published online ahead of print Dec. 30, 2019, in JAMA Neurology. The results may explain why previous research failed to find adverse neurodevelopmental effects of breastfeeding in infants whose mothers are undergoing AED treatment, said the authors.
“The results of this study add support to the general safety of breastfeeding by mothers with epilepsy who take AEDs,” wrote Angela K. Birnbaum, PhD, professor of experimental and clinical pharmacology at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, and colleagues.
Investigators measured infants’ blood AED concentrations
To date, medical consensus about the safety of breastfeeding while the mother is taking AEDs has been elusive. Researchers have investigated breast milk concentrations of AEDs as surrogate markers of AED concentrations in children. Breast milk concentrations, however, do not account for differences in infant pharmacokinetic processes and thus could misrepresent AED exposure in children through breastfeeding.
Dr. Birnbaum and colleagues sought to measure blood concentrations of AEDs in mothers with epilepsy and the infants that they breastfed to achieve an objective measure of AED exposure through breastfeeding. They examined data collected from December 2012 to October 2016 in the prospective Maternal Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs (MONEAD) study. Eligible participants were pregnant women with epilepsy between the ages of 14 and 45 years whose pregnancies had progressed to fewer than 20 weeks’ gestational age and who had IQ scores greater than 70 points. Participants were followed up throughout pregnancy and for 9 months post partum. Children were enrolled at birth.
The investigators collected blood samples from mothers and infants who were breastfed at the same visit, which occurred at between 5 and 20 weeks after birth. The volume of ingested breast milk delivered through graduated feeding bottles each day and the total duration of all daily breastfeeding sessions were recorded. For infants, blood samples were collected from the plantar surface of the heel and stored as dried blood spots on filter paper. The study’s primary endpoint was the percentage of infant-to-mother concentration of AEDs. Concentrations of AEDs in infants at less than the lower limit of quantification were assessed as half of the lower limit.
Exposure in utero may be greater than exposure through breast milk
In all, the researchers enrolled 351 pregnant women with epilepsy into the study and collected data on 345 infants. Two hundred twenty-two (64.3%) of the infants were breastfed, and 146 (42.3%) had AED concentrations available. After excluding outliers and mothers with missing concentration data, Dr. Birnbaum and colleagues included 164 matching infant-mother concentration pairs in their analysis (i.e., of 135 mothers and 138 infants). Approximately 52% of the infants were female, and their median age at blood collection was 13 weeks. The mothers’ median age was 32 years. About 82% of mothers were receiving monotherapy. The investigators found no demographic differences between groups of mothers taking various AEDs.
Sixty-eight infants (49.3%) had AED concentrations that were less than the lower limit of quantification. AED concentration was not greater than the lower limit of quantification for any infants breastfed by mothers taking carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine, valproic acid, or topiramate. Most levetiracetam (71.4%) and zonisamide (60.0%) concentrations in infants were less than the lower limit of quantification. Most lamotrigine concentrations in infants (88.6%) were greater than the lower limit of quantification.
The median percentage of infant-to-mother concentration was 28.9% for lamotrigine, 5.3% for levetiracetam, 44.2% for zonisamide, 5.7% for carbamazepine, 5.4% for carbamazepine epoxide, 0.3% for oxcarbazepine, 17.2% for topiramate, and 21.4% for valproic acid. Multiple linear regression models indicated that maternal concentration was significantly associated with lamotrigine concentration in infants, but not levetiracetam concentration in infants.
“Prior studies at delivery demonstrated that umbilical-cord concentrations were nearly equal to maternal concentrations, suggesting extensive placental passage to the fetus,” wrote Dr. Birnbaum and colleagues. “Therefore, the amount of AED exposure via breast milk is likely substantially lower than fetal exposure during pregnancy and appears unlikely to confer any additional risks beyond those that might be associated with exposure in pregnancy, especially given prior studies showing no adverse neurodevelopmental effects of breastfeeding while taking AEDs.”
The investigators acknowledged several limitations of their research, including the observational design of the MONEAD study. The amount of AED in participants’ breast milk is unknown, and the investigators could not calculate relative infant dosages. Only one blood sample was taken per infant, thus the results may not reflect infants’ total exposure over time.
The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and the National Institute of Child Health and Development funded the research. The authors reported receiving research support from various pharmaceutical companies.
SOURCE: Birnbaum AK et al. JAMA Neurol. 2019 Dec 30. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.4443.
, according to a study published online ahead of print Dec. 30, 2019, in JAMA Neurology. The results may explain why previous research failed to find adverse neurodevelopmental effects of breastfeeding in infants whose mothers are undergoing AED treatment, said the authors.
“The results of this study add support to the general safety of breastfeeding by mothers with epilepsy who take AEDs,” wrote Angela K. Birnbaum, PhD, professor of experimental and clinical pharmacology at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, and colleagues.
Investigators measured infants’ blood AED concentrations
To date, medical consensus about the safety of breastfeeding while the mother is taking AEDs has been elusive. Researchers have investigated breast milk concentrations of AEDs as surrogate markers of AED concentrations in children. Breast milk concentrations, however, do not account for differences in infant pharmacokinetic processes and thus could misrepresent AED exposure in children through breastfeeding.
Dr. Birnbaum and colleagues sought to measure blood concentrations of AEDs in mothers with epilepsy and the infants that they breastfed to achieve an objective measure of AED exposure through breastfeeding. They examined data collected from December 2012 to October 2016 in the prospective Maternal Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs (MONEAD) study. Eligible participants were pregnant women with epilepsy between the ages of 14 and 45 years whose pregnancies had progressed to fewer than 20 weeks’ gestational age and who had IQ scores greater than 70 points. Participants were followed up throughout pregnancy and for 9 months post partum. Children were enrolled at birth.
The investigators collected blood samples from mothers and infants who were breastfed at the same visit, which occurred at between 5 and 20 weeks after birth. The volume of ingested breast milk delivered through graduated feeding bottles each day and the total duration of all daily breastfeeding sessions were recorded. For infants, blood samples were collected from the plantar surface of the heel and stored as dried blood spots on filter paper. The study’s primary endpoint was the percentage of infant-to-mother concentration of AEDs. Concentrations of AEDs in infants at less than the lower limit of quantification were assessed as half of the lower limit.
Exposure in utero may be greater than exposure through breast milk
In all, the researchers enrolled 351 pregnant women with epilepsy into the study and collected data on 345 infants. Two hundred twenty-two (64.3%) of the infants were breastfed, and 146 (42.3%) had AED concentrations available. After excluding outliers and mothers with missing concentration data, Dr. Birnbaum and colleagues included 164 matching infant-mother concentration pairs in their analysis (i.e., of 135 mothers and 138 infants). Approximately 52% of the infants were female, and their median age at blood collection was 13 weeks. The mothers’ median age was 32 years. About 82% of mothers were receiving monotherapy. The investigators found no demographic differences between groups of mothers taking various AEDs.
Sixty-eight infants (49.3%) had AED concentrations that were less than the lower limit of quantification. AED concentration was not greater than the lower limit of quantification for any infants breastfed by mothers taking carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine, valproic acid, or topiramate. Most levetiracetam (71.4%) and zonisamide (60.0%) concentrations in infants were less than the lower limit of quantification. Most lamotrigine concentrations in infants (88.6%) were greater than the lower limit of quantification.
The median percentage of infant-to-mother concentration was 28.9% for lamotrigine, 5.3% for levetiracetam, 44.2% for zonisamide, 5.7% for carbamazepine, 5.4% for carbamazepine epoxide, 0.3% for oxcarbazepine, 17.2% for topiramate, and 21.4% for valproic acid. Multiple linear regression models indicated that maternal concentration was significantly associated with lamotrigine concentration in infants, but not levetiracetam concentration in infants.
“Prior studies at delivery demonstrated that umbilical-cord concentrations were nearly equal to maternal concentrations, suggesting extensive placental passage to the fetus,” wrote Dr. Birnbaum and colleagues. “Therefore, the amount of AED exposure via breast milk is likely substantially lower than fetal exposure during pregnancy and appears unlikely to confer any additional risks beyond those that might be associated with exposure in pregnancy, especially given prior studies showing no adverse neurodevelopmental effects of breastfeeding while taking AEDs.”
The investigators acknowledged several limitations of their research, including the observational design of the MONEAD study. The amount of AED in participants’ breast milk is unknown, and the investigators could not calculate relative infant dosages. Only one blood sample was taken per infant, thus the results may not reflect infants’ total exposure over time.
The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke and the National Institute of Child Health and Development funded the research. The authors reported receiving research support from various pharmaceutical companies.
SOURCE: Birnbaum AK et al. JAMA Neurol. 2019 Dec 30. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2019.4443.
FROM JAMA NEUROLOGY
First autoimmune epilepsy RCT supports IVIG therapy
BALTIMORE –
Although the numbers of enrolled subjects was small, it was the first double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial in autoimmune epilepsy, the start of a level 1 evidence base. Until now, treatment has been based mostly on case reports and expert opinion. “We’ve clearly shown that immunotherapy works and that treating early makes a difference, much more so than antiseizure medications,” said lead author Divyanshu Dubey, MBBS, from the Mayo Clinic.
The lack of data has meant that “we couldn’t get insurance approval for IVIG, so people have generally leaned towards” high-dose intravenous steroids, which are problematic because LGI-1 antibody epilepsy is a disease of older people, in whom osteoporosis, underlying infections, and other problems complicate steroid use, Dr. Dubey said.
The trial also included three people with contactin-associated-protein-like-2 (CASPR2) antibody epilepsy, but they all wound up in the placebo arm, “so it’s hard to say anything about them,” Dr. Dubey said at the American Epilepsy Society annual meeting. The work was published shortly before the meeting (Ann Neurol. 2019 Nov 28. doi: 10.1002/ana.25655).
CASPR2 and LGI-1 are proteins found in brain cells; attack by antibodies triggers encephalitis and tens to hundreds of seizures per day. The seizures tend to diminish with time, but the cognitive damage caused by the encephalitis does not. “We’ve seen patients end up in nursing homes diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease” because the conditions weren’t recognized and treated, Dr. Dubey said.
He and his team chose LGI-1 and CASPR2 epilepsy because of the potentially devastating consequences and because they are among the most common autoimmune epilepsies for which antibodies have been identified. There was also a hope that positive results might open up insurance coverage.
The trial randomized eight people to IVIG 0.5 g/kg on day 1; 1 g/kg on day 2; and 0.6 g/kg once at 3 and 5 weeks. Nine others were randomized to volume-matched IV saline placebo on the same schedule. After enrollment of 17 patients (LGI1-IgG, 14; CASPR2-IgG, 3) over 34 months, the study was terminated because of slow enrollment.
Although none of the LGI-1 subjects in the placebo group responded, two CASPR2 patients did, yielding an IVIG response rate of 75% versus 22% (2/9) in the placebo arm after week 5 (odds ratio, 10.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-98.9; P = .044).
Two of the LGI-1 subjects in the IVIG arm were completely seizure free after treatment. Results in both arms, meanwhile, did not correlate with concomitant antiseizure medications among those who were on them.
All eight IVIG patients showed stabilization or improvement in cognitive function, compared with two of five in the placebo arm, as gauged by Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status scores. Patients in the IVIG arm gained a median of 3 points, while patients in the placebo arm lost a median of 1 point (P = .077).
At week 5, six patients with persistent seizures who were in the placebo group were switched to the IVIG regimen after unblinding; four (67%) reported more than a 50% reduction in seizures.
Responses did not correlate with LGI-1/CASPR2-IgG1-4 subclass, and there were no IVIG-associated adverse events. One IVIG patients fell because of a faciobrachial dystonic seizure, a classic sign of LGI-1 disease. Antibodies were not measured in the trial because they “do not correlate with severity of autoimmune epilepsy,” Dr. Dubey said.
The original plan was to enroll 30 subjects, but the investigators terminated the study after 18 because of slow enrollment. With knowledge of autoimmune epilepsy growing at Mayo, it was increasingly difficult to find immunotherapy-naive patients, he said.
All the subjects were between 60 and 70 years old, and the majority in both arms were men, which was not surprising because the conditions skew male, Dr. Dubey said. None of the patients had underlying tumors, which are known triggers of autoimmune epilepsy.
This work was funded by Grifols Shared Services, a maker of IVIG, and Option Care, a provider of home infusion equipment. Dr. Dubey said the company had no active role in the trial, but that the lack of insurance coverage for IVIG in autoimmune epilepsy was one of the drivers of the study. He disclosed research support from Grifols; another investigator is a consultant.
SOURCE: Dubey D et al. AES 2019, Abstract 1.292.
BALTIMORE –
Although the numbers of enrolled subjects was small, it was the first double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial in autoimmune epilepsy, the start of a level 1 evidence base. Until now, treatment has been based mostly on case reports and expert opinion. “We’ve clearly shown that immunotherapy works and that treating early makes a difference, much more so than antiseizure medications,” said lead author Divyanshu Dubey, MBBS, from the Mayo Clinic.
The lack of data has meant that “we couldn’t get insurance approval for IVIG, so people have generally leaned towards” high-dose intravenous steroids, which are problematic because LGI-1 antibody epilepsy is a disease of older people, in whom osteoporosis, underlying infections, and other problems complicate steroid use, Dr. Dubey said.
The trial also included three people with contactin-associated-protein-like-2 (CASPR2) antibody epilepsy, but they all wound up in the placebo arm, “so it’s hard to say anything about them,” Dr. Dubey said at the American Epilepsy Society annual meeting. The work was published shortly before the meeting (Ann Neurol. 2019 Nov 28. doi: 10.1002/ana.25655).
CASPR2 and LGI-1 are proteins found in brain cells; attack by antibodies triggers encephalitis and tens to hundreds of seizures per day. The seizures tend to diminish with time, but the cognitive damage caused by the encephalitis does not. “We’ve seen patients end up in nursing homes diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease” because the conditions weren’t recognized and treated, Dr. Dubey said.
He and his team chose LGI-1 and CASPR2 epilepsy because of the potentially devastating consequences and because they are among the most common autoimmune epilepsies for which antibodies have been identified. There was also a hope that positive results might open up insurance coverage.
The trial randomized eight people to IVIG 0.5 g/kg on day 1; 1 g/kg on day 2; and 0.6 g/kg once at 3 and 5 weeks. Nine others were randomized to volume-matched IV saline placebo on the same schedule. After enrollment of 17 patients (LGI1-IgG, 14; CASPR2-IgG, 3) over 34 months, the study was terminated because of slow enrollment.
Although none of the LGI-1 subjects in the placebo group responded, two CASPR2 patients did, yielding an IVIG response rate of 75% versus 22% (2/9) in the placebo arm after week 5 (odds ratio, 10.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-98.9; P = .044).
Two of the LGI-1 subjects in the IVIG arm were completely seizure free after treatment. Results in both arms, meanwhile, did not correlate with concomitant antiseizure medications among those who were on them.
All eight IVIG patients showed stabilization or improvement in cognitive function, compared with two of five in the placebo arm, as gauged by Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status scores. Patients in the IVIG arm gained a median of 3 points, while patients in the placebo arm lost a median of 1 point (P = .077).
At week 5, six patients with persistent seizures who were in the placebo group were switched to the IVIG regimen after unblinding; four (67%) reported more than a 50% reduction in seizures.
Responses did not correlate with LGI-1/CASPR2-IgG1-4 subclass, and there were no IVIG-associated adverse events. One IVIG patients fell because of a faciobrachial dystonic seizure, a classic sign of LGI-1 disease. Antibodies were not measured in the trial because they “do not correlate with severity of autoimmune epilepsy,” Dr. Dubey said.
The original plan was to enroll 30 subjects, but the investigators terminated the study after 18 because of slow enrollment. With knowledge of autoimmune epilepsy growing at Mayo, it was increasingly difficult to find immunotherapy-naive patients, he said.
All the subjects were between 60 and 70 years old, and the majority in both arms were men, which was not surprising because the conditions skew male, Dr. Dubey said. None of the patients had underlying tumors, which are known triggers of autoimmune epilepsy.
This work was funded by Grifols Shared Services, a maker of IVIG, and Option Care, a provider of home infusion equipment. Dr. Dubey said the company had no active role in the trial, but that the lack of insurance coverage for IVIG in autoimmune epilepsy was one of the drivers of the study. He disclosed research support from Grifols; another investigator is a consultant.
SOURCE: Dubey D et al. AES 2019, Abstract 1.292.
BALTIMORE –
Although the numbers of enrolled subjects was small, it was the first double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial in autoimmune epilepsy, the start of a level 1 evidence base. Until now, treatment has been based mostly on case reports and expert opinion. “We’ve clearly shown that immunotherapy works and that treating early makes a difference, much more so than antiseizure medications,” said lead author Divyanshu Dubey, MBBS, from the Mayo Clinic.
The lack of data has meant that “we couldn’t get insurance approval for IVIG, so people have generally leaned towards” high-dose intravenous steroids, which are problematic because LGI-1 antibody epilepsy is a disease of older people, in whom osteoporosis, underlying infections, and other problems complicate steroid use, Dr. Dubey said.
The trial also included three people with contactin-associated-protein-like-2 (CASPR2) antibody epilepsy, but they all wound up in the placebo arm, “so it’s hard to say anything about them,” Dr. Dubey said at the American Epilepsy Society annual meeting. The work was published shortly before the meeting (Ann Neurol. 2019 Nov 28. doi: 10.1002/ana.25655).
CASPR2 and LGI-1 are proteins found in brain cells; attack by antibodies triggers encephalitis and tens to hundreds of seizures per day. The seizures tend to diminish with time, but the cognitive damage caused by the encephalitis does not. “We’ve seen patients end up in nursing homes diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease” because the conditions weren’t recognized and treated, Dr. Dubey said.
He and his team chose LGI-1 and CASPR2 epilepsy because of the potentially devastating consequences and because they are among the most common autoimmune epilepsies for which antibodies have been identified. There was also a hope that positive results might open up insurance coverage.
The trial randomized eight people to IVIG 0.5 g/kg on day 1; 1 g/kg on day 2; and 0.6 g/kg once at 3 and 5 weeks. Nine others were randomized to volume-matched IV saline placebo on the same schedule. After enrollment of 17 patients (LGI1-IgG, 14; CASPR2-IgG, 3) over 34 months, the study was terminated because of slow enrollment.
Although none of the LGI-1 subjects in the placebo group responded, two CASPR2 patients did, yielding an IVIG response rate of 75% versus 22% (2/9) in the placebo arm after week 5 (odds ratio, 10.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-98.9; P = .044).
Two of the LGI-1 subjects in the IVIG arm were completely seizure free after treatment. Results in both arms, meanwhile, did not correlate with concomitant antiseizure medications among those who were on them.
All eight IVIG patients showed stabilization or improvement in cognitive function, compared with two of five in the placebo arm, as gauged by Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status scores. Patients in the IVIG arm gained a median of 3 points, while patients in the placebo arm lost a median of 1 point (P = .077).
At week 5, six patients with persistent seizures who were in the placebo group were switched to the IVIG regimen after unblinding; four (67%) reported more than a 50% reduction in seizures.
Responses did not correlate with LGI-1/CASPR2-IgG1-4 subclass, and there were no IVIG-associated adverse events. One IVIG patients fell because of a faciobrachial dystonic seizure, a classic sign of LGI-1 disease. Antibodies were not measured in the trial because they “do not correlate with severity of autoimmune epilepsy,” Dr. Dubey said.
The original plan was to enroll 30 subjects, but the investigators terminated the study after 18 because of slow enrollment. With knowledge of autoimmune epilepsy growing at Mayo, it was increasingly difficult to find immunotherapy-naive patients, he said.
All the subjects were between 60 and 70 years old, and the majority in both arms were men, which was not surprising because the conditions skew male, Dr. Dubey said. None of the patients had underlying tumors, which are known triggers of autoimmune epilepsy.
This work was funded by Grifols Shared Services, a maker of IVIG, and Option Care, a provider of home infusion equipment. Dr. Dubey said the company had no active role in the trial, but that the lack of insurance coverage for IVIG in autoimmune epilepsy was one of the drivers of the study. He disclosed research support from Grifols; another investigator is a consultant.
SOURCE: Dubey D et al. AES 2019, Abstract 1.292.
REPORTING FROM AES 2019
FDA warns gabapentin, pregabalin may cause serious breathing problems
Elderly patients who take these drugs also are at increased risk of breathing problems, the announcement said.
Gabapentin (marketed as Neurontin, Gralise, and Horizant) and pregabalin (Lyrica and Lyrica CR) are used to treat seizures, nerve pain, and restless legs syndrome. Physicians increasingly are prescribing these medications, and people are misusing and abusing these drugs more frequently, the agency said. Gabapentin and pregabalin often are combined with central nervous system depressants such as opioids, antianxiety medicines, antidepressants, and antihistamines, which increases the risk of respiratory depression.
Conditions that reduce lung function, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), also increase the likelihood of breathing problems when taking gabapentin and pregabalin.
“There is less evidence supporting the risk of serious breathing difficulties in healthy individuals taking gabapentinoids alone. We will continue to monitor these medicines as part of our routine monitoring of all FDA-approved drugs,” the announcement said.
The FDA is requiring new warnings about the risk of respiratory depression in the prescribing information of gabapentinoids. In addition, drug manufacturers must further assess the abuse potential of these drugs, particularly in combination with opioids.
Patients and caregivers should seek immediate medical attention for respiratory problems, which can be life threatening. Symptoms include confusion or disorientation; unusual dizziness or lightheadedness; extreme sleepiness or lethargy; slowed, shallow, or difficult breathing; unresponsiveness; and bluish-colored or tinted skin, especially on the lips, fingers, and toes.
Physicians should start gabapentinoids at the lowest dose and monitor patients for symptoms of respiratory depression and sedation when coprescribing these drugs with an opioid or other central nervous system depressant such as a benzodiazepine, according to the FDA.
The agency reviewed 49 case reports that were submitted between 2012 and 2017. Among these cases, 12 people died from respiratory depression with gabapentinoids. All of the patients who died had at least one risk factor.
Gabapentin first was approved in 1993, and pregabalin was approved in 2004. Drug adverse events and side effects can be reported online, the agency noted.
Elderly patients who take these drugs also are at increased risk of breathing problems, the announcement said.
Gabapentin (marketed as Neurontin, Gralise, and Horizant) and pregabalin (Lyrica and Lyrica CR) are used to treat seizures, nerve pain, and restless legs syndrome. Physicians increasingly are prescribing these medications, and people are misusing and abusing these drugs more frequently, the agency said. Gabapentin and pregabalin often are combined with central nervous system depressants such as opioids, antianxiety medicines, antidepressants, and antihistamines, which increases the risk of respiratory depression.
Conditions that reduce lung function, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), also increase the likelihood of breathing problems when taking gabapentin and pregabalin.
“There is less evidence supporting the risk of serious breathing difficulties in healthy individuals taking gabapentinoids alone. We will continue to monitor these medicines as part of our routine monitoring of all FDA-approved drugs,” the announcement said.
The FDA is requiring new warnings about the risk of respiratory depression in the prescribing information of gabapentinoids. In addition, drug manufacturers must further assess the abuse potential of these drugs, particularly in combination with opioids.
Patients and caregivers should seek immediate medical attention for respiratory problems, which can be life threatening. Symptoms include confusion or disorientation; unusual dizziness or lightheadedness; extreme sleepiness or lethargy; slowed, shallow, or difficult breathing; unresponsiveness; and bluish-colored or tinted skin, especially on the lips, fingers, and toes.
Physicians should start gabapentinoids at the lowest dose and monitor patients for symptoms of respiratory depression and sedation when coprescribing these drugs with an opioid or other central nervous system depressant such as a benzodiazepine, according to the FDA.
The agency reviewed 49 case reports that were submitted between 2012 and 2017. Among these cases, 12 people died from respiratory depression with gabapentinoids. All of the patients who died had at least one risk factor.
Gabapentin first was approved in 1993, and pregabalin was approved in 2004. Drug adverse events and side effects can be reported online, the agency noted.
Elderly patients who take these drugs also are at increased risk of breathing problems, the announcement said.
Gabapentin (marketed as Neurontin, Gralise, and Horizant) and pregabalin (Lyrica and Lyrica CR) are used to treat seizures, nerve pain, and restless legs syndrome. Physicians increasingly are prescribing these medications, and people are misusing and abusing these drugs more frequently, the agency said. Gabapentin and pregabalin often are combined with central nervous system depressants such as opioids, antianxiety medicines, antidepressants, and antihistamines, which increases the risk of respiratory depression.
Conditions that reduce lung function, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), also increase the likelihood of breathing problems when taking gabapentin and pregabalin.
“There is less evidence supporting the risk of serious breathing difficulties in healthy individuals taking gabapentinoids alone. We will continue to monitor these medicines as part of our routine monitoring of all FDA-approved drugs,” the announcement said.
The FDA is requiring new warnings about the risk of respiratory depression in the prescribing information of gabapentinoids. In addition, drug manufacturers must further assess the abuse potential of these drugs, particularly in combination with opioids.
Patients and caregivers should seek immediate medical attention for respiratory problems, which can be life threatening. Symptoms include confusion or disorientation; unusual dizziness or lightheadedness; extreme sleepiness or lethargy; slowed, shallow, or difficult breathing; unresponsiveness; and bluish-colored or tinted skin, especially on the lips, fingers, and toes.
Physicians should start gabapentinoids at the lowest dose and monitor patients for symptoms of respiratory depression and sedation when coprescribing these drugs with an opioid or other central nervous system depressant such as a benzodiazepine, according to the FDA.
The agency reviewed 49 case reports that were submitted between 2012 and 2017. Among these cases, 12 people died from respiratory depression with gabapentinoids. All of the patients who died had at least one risk factor.
Gabapentin first was approved in 1993, and pregabalin was approved in 2004. Drug adverse events and side effects can be reported online, the agency noted.
Employment is associated with high likelihood of declining epilepsy surgery
BALTIMORE – , according to an analysis presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. “Future work should confirm this finding prospectively, determine if it holds in other patient populations, and explore the decision to proceed with or decline epilepsy surgery from a patient-centered perspective,” said Vishal Mandge, MD, MPH, a clinical neurophysiology fellow at Duke University in Durham, N.C., and colleagues. “Identifying the role that factors such as the fear of losing employment due to complications from surgery and inability to take medical leave for an extended period of time play in the patient’s decision to proceed with epilepsy surgery may identify needs and suggest strategies to reduce barriers to this underutilized treatment.”
Although epilepsy surgery is known to be safe and effective, many surgical candidates with drug-resistant epilepsy decline to undergo the procedure. Prior investigations of the barriers to epilepsy surgery have focused on access to epilepsy centers that offer epilepsy surgery and patients’ reluctance to undergo presurgical evaluation. Dr. Mandge and colleagues instead set out to evaluate the association between various demographic, disease-specific, and epilepsy-evaluation variables and patients’ decision to decline surgery after they have been identified as candidates.
A retrospective case-control study
The investigators conducted a retrospective case-control study of patients who were discussed at the epilepsy surgery conference of a tertiary care hospital serving an urban New York community between Jan. 1, 2009, and June 30, 2017. They identified patients who were considered candidates for resective epilepsy surgery. Dr. Mandge and colleagues used the chi-squared test for nominal variables and analysis of variance for scale variables to evaluate these variables’ associations with a patient’s decision to decline epilepsy surgery. They also performed multivariate binary logistic regression to identify variables that predict a patient’s decision to decline surgery.
Dr. Mandge and colleagues identified 159 patients who were discussed during the study period. Of this group, 87 patients were eligible for resective epilepsy surgery after a thorough evaluation. Thirty-four (40%) of the eligible patients declined to undergo surgery. Approximately 20% of eligible patients were employed, and 70% of patients had a high school diploma or higher education.
Univariate analysis indicated that employment (odds ratio, 4.2), temporal lesion on MRI (OR, 0.35), temporal EEG localization (OR, 0.21), and temporal seizure onset zone (OR, 0.19) were independently and significantly associated with a patient’s decision to decline surgery. Multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that current employment (OR, 7.5), the number of current antiepileptic drugs (AEDs; OR, 3.5), and concordance between seizure semiology, seizure onset on EEG, and imaging (OR, 0.08) were significantly associated with a patient’s decision to decline surgery.
Fear of unemployment may explain results
“With each additional AED, the patients were 3.5 times more likely to decline surgery, even after adjusting for other variables,” said Alexis D. Boro, MD, a neurologist at Montefiore Medical Center in New York and one of the investigators. “My suspicion is that some of this reflects the burden of taking a lot of seizure medication. While the medications are much, much safer than seizures, and looking for and dealing with side effects is a lot of what we do, people often don’t feel great when they are taking multiple seizure medications. We counsel our patients that they should generally expect to stay on some seizure medications after surgery. The reason for surgery is to stop the seizures, not to stop the medications. We are often able to reduce medications after a period of time after surgery, and for many patients, this is one of the benefits.”
The association between employment and increased likelihood of declining surgery was unexpected and may not hold everywhere, said Dr. Boro. “We had expected the opposite result because we assumed that employed patients would be concerned that a seizure at work might result in loss of work. But it may be that many of our patients who are employed are concerned about losing their jobs if they miss work for a medical procedure. Some of our patients may be concerned about sharing medical information with their employers. For some of our patients, being employed may imply limited insurance coverage.”
The study was not supported by external funding, and the investigators did not report any disclosures.
SOURCE: Mandge VA et al. AES 2019, Abstract 1.362.
BALTIMORE – , according to an analysis presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. “Future work should confirm this finding prospectively, determine if it holds in other patient populations, and explore the decision to proceed with or decline epilepsy surgery from a patient-centered perspective,” said Vishal Mandge, MD, MPH, a clinical neurophysiology fellow at Duke University in Durham, N.C., and colleagues. “Identifying the role that factors such as the fear of losing employment due to complications from surgery and inability to take medical leave for an extended period of time play in the patient’s decision to proceed with epilepsy surgery may identify needs and suggest strategies to reduce barriers to this underutilized treatment.”
Although epilepsy surgery is known to be safe and effective, many surgical candidates with drug-resistant epilepsy decline to undergo the procedure. Prior investigations of the barriers to epilepsy surgery have focused on access to epilepsy centers that offer epilepsy surgery and patients’ reluctance to undergo presurgical evaluation. Dr. Mandge and colleagues instead set out to evaluate the association between various demographic, disease-specific, and epilepsy-evaluation variables and patients’ decision to decline surgery after they have been identified as candidates.
A retrospective case-control study
The investigators conducted a retrospective case-control study of patients who were discussed at the epilepsy surgery conference of a tertiary care hospital serving an urban New York community between Jan. 1, 2009, and June 30, 2017. They identified patients who were considered candidates for resective epilepsy surgery. Dr. Mandge and colleagues used the chi-squared test for nominal variables and analysis of variance for scale variables to evaluate these variables’ associations with a patient’s decision to decline epilepsy surgery. They also performed multivariate binary logistic regression to identify variables that predict a patient’s decision to decline surgery.
Dr. Mandge and colleagues identified 159 patients who were discussed during the study period. Of this group, 87 patients were eligible for resective epilepsy surgery after a thorough evaluation. Thirty-four (40%) of the eligible patients declined to undergo surgery. Approximately 20% of eligible patients were employed, and 70% of patients had a high school diploma or higher education.
Univariate analysis indicated that employment (odds ratio, 4.2), temporal lesion on MRI (OR, 0.35), temporal EEG localization (OR, 0.21), and temporal seizure onset zone (OR, 0.19) were independently and significantly associated with a patient’s decision to decline surgery. Multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that current employment (OR, 7.5), the number of current antiepileptic drugs (AEDs; OR, 3.5), and concordance between seizure semiology, seizure onset on EEG, and imaging (OR, 0.08) were significantly associated with a patient’s decision to decline surgery.
Fear of unemployment may explain results
“With each additional AED, the patients were 3.5 times more likely to decline surgery, even after adjusting for other variables,” said Alexis D. Boro, MD, a neurologist at Montefiore Medical Center in New York and one of the investigators. “My suspicion is that some of this reflects the burden of taking a lot of seizure medication. While the medications are much, much safer than seizures, and looking for and dealing with side effects is a lot of what we do, people often don’t feel great when they are taking multiple seizure medications. We counsel our patients that they should generally expect to stay on some seizure medications after surgery. The reason for surgery is to stop the seizures, not to stop the medications. We are often able to reduce medications after a period of time after surgery, and for many patients, this is one of the benefits.”
The association between employment and increased likelihood of declining surgery was unexpected and may not hold everywhere, said Dr. Boro. “We had expected the opposite result because we assumed that employed patients would be concerned that a seizure at work might result in loss of work. But it may be that many of our patients who are employed are concerned about losing their jobs if they miss work for a medical procedure. Some of our patients may be concerned about sharing medical information with their employers. For some of our patients, being employed may imply limited insurance coverage.”
The study was not supported by external funding, and the investigators did not report any disclosures.
SOURCE: Mandge VA et al. AES 2019, Abstract 1.362.
BALTIMORE – , according to an analysis presented at the annual meeting of the American Epilepsy Society. “Future work should confirm this finding prospectively, determine if it holds in other patient populations, and explore the decision to proceed with or decline epilepsy surgery from a patient-centered perspective,” said Vishal Mandge, MD, MPH, a clinical neurophysiology fellow at Duke University in Durham, N.C., and colleagues. “Identifying the role that factors such as the fear of losing employment due to complications from surgery and inability to take medical leave for an extended period of time play in the patient’s decision to proceed with epilepsy surgery may identify needs and suggest strategies to reduce barriers to this underutilized treatment.”
Although epilepsy surgery is known to be safe and effective, many surgical candidates with drug-resistant epilepsy decline to undergo the procedure. Prior investigations of the barriers to epilepsy surgery have focused on access to epilepsy centers that offer epilepsy surgery and patients’ reluctance to undergo presurgical evaluation. Dr. Mandge and colleagues instead set out to evaluate the association between various demographic, disease-specific, and epilepsy-evaluation variables and patients’ decision to decline surgery after they have been identified as candidates.
A retrospective case-control study
The investigators conducted a retrospective case-control study of patients who were discussed at the epilepsy surgery conference of a tertiary care hospital serving an urban New York community between Jan. 1, 2009, and June 30, 2017. They identified patients who were considered candidates for resective epilepsy surgery. Dr. Mandge and colleagues used the chi-squared test for nominal variables and analysis of variance for scale variables to evaluate these variables’ associations with a patient’s decision to decline epilepsy surgery. They also performed multivariate binary logistic regression to identify variables that predict a patient’s decision to decline surgery.
Dr. Mandge and colleagues identified 159 patients who were discussed during the study period. Of this group, 87 patients were eligible for resective epilepsy surgery after a thorough evaluation. Thirty-four (40%) of the eligible patients declined to undergo surgery. Approximately 20% of eligible patients were employed, and 70% of patients had a high school diploma or higher education.
Univariate analysis indicated that employment (odds ratio, 4.2), temporal lesion on MRI (OR, 0.35), temporal EEG localization (OR, 0.21), and temporal seizure onset zone (OR, 0.19) were independently and significantly associated with a patient’s decision to decline surgery. Multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that current employment (OR, 7.5), the number of current antiepileptic drugs (AEDs; OR, 3.5), and concordance between seizure semiology, seizure onset on EEG, and imaging (OR, 0.08) were significantly associated with a patient’s decision to decline surgery.
Fear of unemployment may explain results
“With each additional AED, the patients were 3.5 times more likely to decline surgery, even after adjusting for other variables,” said Alexis D. Boro, MD, a neurologist at Montefiore Medical Center in New York and one of the investigators. “My suspicion is that some of this reflects the burden of taking a lot of seizure medication. While the medications are much, much safer than seizures, and looking for and dealing with side effects is a lot of what we do, people often don’t feel great when they are taking multiple seizure medications. We counsel our patients that they should generally expect to stay on some seizure medications after surgery. The reason for surgery is to stop the seizures, not to stop the medications. We are often able to reduce medications after a period of time after surgery, and for many patients, this is one of the benefits.”
The association between employment and increased likelihood of declining surgery was unexpected and may not hold everywhere, said Dr. Boro. “We had expected the opposite result because we assumed that employed patients would be concerned that a seizure at work might result in loss of work. But it may be that many of our patients who are employed are concerned about losing their jobs if they miss work for a medical procedure. Some of our patients may be concerned about sharing medical information with their employers. For some of our patients, being employed may imply limited insurance coverage.”
The study was not supported by external funding, and the investigators did not report any disclosures.
SOURCE: Mandge VA et al. AES 2019, Abstract 1.362.
REPORTING FROM AES 2019