Neurology

BANGKOK – For a form of epilepsy treatment that’s been around since the 1920s, ketogenic diet therapy has lately been the focus of a surprising wealth of clinical research and development, Suvasini Sharma, MD, observed at the International Epilepsy Congress.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

This high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet is now well established as a valid and effective treatment option for children and adults with drug-refractory epilepsy who aren’t candidates for surgery. That’s about a third of all epilepsy patients. And as the recently overhauled pediatric ketogenic diet therapy (KDT) best practice consensus guidelines emphasize, KDT should be strongly considered after two antiepileptic drugs have failed, and even earlier for several epilepsy syndromes, noted Dr. Sharma, a pediatric neurologist at Lady Hardinge Medical College and Kalawati Saran Children’s Hospital in New Delhi, and a coauthor of the updated guidelines.

“The consensus guidelines recommend that you start thinking about the diet early, without waiting for every drug to fail,” she said at the congress, sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy.

Among the KDT-related topics she highlighted were the recently revised best practice consensus guidelines; an expanding role for KDT in infants, critical care settings, and in epileptic encephalopathies; mounting evidence that KDT provides additional benefits beyond seizure control; and promising new alternative diet therapies. She also described the challenges of using KDT in a low-resource nation such as India, where most of the 1.3 billion people shop in markets where food isn’t packaged with the nutritional content labels essential to traditional KDTs, and low literacy is common.


 

KDT best practice guidelines

The latest guidelines, which include the details of standardized KDT protocols as well as a summary of recent translational research into mechanisms of action, replace the previous 10-year-old version. Flexibility is now the watchword. While the classic KDT was started as an inpatient intervention involving several days of fasting followed by multiday gradual reintroduction of calories, that approach is now deemed optional (Epilepsia Open. 2018 May 21;3[2]:175-92).

“By and large, the trend now is going to nonfasting initiation on an outpatient basis, but with more stringent monitoring,” according to Dr. Sharma.

The guidelines note that while the research literature shows that, on average, KDT results in about a 50% chance of at least a 50% reduction in seizure frequency in patients with drug-refractory epilepsy, there are a dozen specific conditions with 70% or greater responder rates: infantile spasms, tuberous sclerosis, epilepsy with myoclonic-atonic seizures, Dravet syndrome, glucose transporter 1 deficiency syndrome (Glut 1DS), pyruvate dehydrogenase deficiency (PDHD), febrile infection-related epilepsy syndrome (FIRES), super-refractory status epilepticus (SRSE), Ohtahara syndrome, complex I mitochondrial disorders, Angelman syndrome, and children with gastrostomy tubes. For Glut1DS and PDHD, KDTs should be considered the treatment of first choice.

Traditionally, KDTs weren’t recommended for children younger than age 2 years. There were concerns that maintaining ketosis and meeting growth requirements were contradictory goals. That’s no longer believed to be so. Indeed, current evidence shows that KDT is highly effective and well tolerated in infants with refractory epilepsy. European guidelines address patient selection, pre-KDT counseling, preferred methods of initiation and KDT discontinuation, and other key issues (Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2016 Nov;20[6]:798-809).

The guidelines recognize four major, well-studied types of KDT: the classic long-chain triglyceride-centric diet; the medium-chain triglyceride diet; the more user-friendly modified Atkins diet; and low glycemic index therapy. Except in children younger than 2 years old, who should be started on the classic KDT, the consensus panel recommended that the specific KDT selected should be based on the family and child situation and the expertise at the local KDT center. Perceived differences in efficacy between the diets aren’t supported by persuasive evidence.
 

KDT benefits beyond seizure control

“Most of us who work in the diet scene are aware that patients often report increased alertness, and sometimes improved cognition,” said Dr. Sharma.

That subjective experience is now supported by evidence from a randomized, controlled trial. Dutch investigators who randomized 50 drug-refractory pediatric epilepsy patients to KDT or usual care documented a positive impact of the diet therapy on cognitive activation, mood, and anxious behavior (Epilepsy Behav. 2016 Jul;60:153-7).

More recently, a systematic review showed that while subjective assessments support claims of improved alertness, attention, and global cognition in patients on KDT for refractory epilepsy, structured neuropsychologic testing confirms the enhanced alertness but without significantly improved global cognition. The investigators reported that the improvements were unrelated to decreases in medication, the type of KDT or age at its introduction, or sleep improvement. Rather, the benefits appeared to be due to a combination of seizure reduction and direct effects of KDT on cognition (Epilepsy Behav. 2018 Oct;87:69-77).

There is also encouraging preliminary evidence of a possible protective effect of KDT against sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) in a mouse model (Epilepsia. 2016 Aug;57[8]:e178-82. doi: 10.1111/epi.13444).
 

The use of KDT in critical care settings

Investigators from the pediatric Status Epilepticus Research Group (pSERG) reported that 10 of 14 patients with convulsive refractory status epilepticus achieved EEG seizure resolution within 7 days after starting KDT. Moreover, 11 patients were able to be weaned off their continuous infusions within 14 days of starting KDT. Treatment-emergent gastroparesis and hypertriglyceridemia occurred in three patients (Epilepsy Res. 2018 Aug;144:1-6).

“It was reasonably well tolerated, but they started it quite late – a median of 13 days after onset of refractory status epilepticus. It should come much earlier on our list of therapies. We shouldn’t be waiting 2 weeks before going to the ketogenic diet, because we can diagnose refractory status epilepticus within 48 hours after arrival in the ICU most of the time,” Dr. Sharma said.

Austrian investigators have pioneered the use of intravenous KDT as a bridge when oral therapy is temporarily impossible because of status epilepticus, surgery, or other reasons. They reported that parental KDT with fat intake of 3.5-4 g/kg per day was safe and effective in their series of 17 young children with epilepsy (Epilepsia Open. 2017 Nov 16;3[1]:30-9).
 

The future: nonketogenic diet therapies

KDT in its various forms is just too demanding and restrictive for some patients. Nonketotic alternatives are being explored.

Triheptanoin is a synthetic medium-chain triglyceride in the form of an edible, odorless, tasteless oil. Its mechanism of action is by anaplerosis: that is, energy generation via replenishment of the tricarboxylic acid cycle. After demonstration of neuroprotective and anticonvulsant effects in several mouse models, Australian investigators conducted a pilot study of 30- to 100-mL/day of oral triheptanoin as add-on therapy in 12 children with drug-refractory epilepsy. Eight of the 12 took triheptanoin for longer than 12 weeks, and 5 of those 8 experienced a sustained greater than 50% reduction in seizure frequency, including 1 who remained seizure free for 30 weeks. Seven children had diarrhea or other GI side effects (Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2018 Nov;22[6]:1074-80).

Parisian investigators have developed a nonketotic, palatable combination of amino acids, carbohydrates, and fatty acids with a low ratio of fat to protein-plus-carbohydrates that provided potent protection against seizures in a mouse model. This suggests that the traditional 4:1 ratio sought in KDT isn’t necessary for robust seizure reduction (Sci Rep. 2017 Jul 14;7[1]:5496).

“This is probably going to be the future of nutritional therapy in epilepsy,” Dr. Sharma predicted.

She reported having no financial conflicts regarding her presentation.

[email protected]

BANGKOK – For a form of epilepsy treatment that’s been around since the 1920s, ketogenic diet therapy has lately been the focus of a surprising wealth of clinical research and development, Suvasini Sharma, MD, observed at the International Epilepsy Congress.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

This high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet is now well established as a valid and effective treatment option for children and adults with drug-refractory epilepsy who aren’t candidates for surgery. That’s about a third of all epilepsy patients. And as the recently overhauled pediatric ketogenic diet therapy (KDT) best practice consensus guidelines emphasize, KDT should be strongly considered after two antiepileptic drugs have failed, and even earlier for several epilepsy syndromes, noted Dr. Sharma, a pediatric neurologist at Lady Hardinge Medical College and Kalawati Saran Children’s Hospital in New Delhi, and a coauthor of the updated guidelines.

“The consensus guidelines recommend that you start thinking about the diet early, without waiting for every drug to fail,” she said at the congress, sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy.

Among the KDT-related topics she highlighted were the recently revised best practice consensus guidelines; an expanding role for KDT in infants, critical care settings, and in epileptic encephalopathies; mounting evidence that KDT provides additional benefits beyond seizure control; and promising new alternative diet therapies. She also described the challenges of using KDT in a low-resource nation such as India, where most of the 1.3 billion people shop in markets where food isn’t packaged with the nutritional content labels essential to traditional KDTs, and low literacy is common.


 

KDT best practice guidelines

The latest guidelines, which include the details of standardized KDT protocols as well as a summary of recent translational research into mechanisms of action, replace the previous 10-year-old version. Flexibility is now the watchword. While the classic KDT was started as an inpatient intervention involving several days of fasting followed by multiday gradual reintroduction of calories, that approach is now deemed optional (Epilepsia Open. 2018 May 21;3[2]:175-92).

“By and large, the trend now is going to nonfasting initiation on an outpatient basis, but with more stringent monitoring,” according to Dr. Sharma.

The guidelines note that while the research literature shows that, on average, KDT results in about a 50% chance of at least a 50% reduction in seizure frequency in patients with drug-refractory epilepsy, there are a dozen specific conditions with 70% or greater responder rates: infantile spasms, tuberous sclerosis, epilepsy with myoclonic-atonic seizures, Dravet syndrome, glucose transporter 1 deficiency syndrome (Glut 1DS), pyruvate dehydrogenase deficiency (PDHD), febrile infection-related epilepsy syndrome (FIRES), super-refractory status epilepticus (SRSE), Ohtahara syndrome, complex I mitochondrial disorders, Angelman syndrome, and children with gastrostomy tubes. For Glut1DS and PDHD, KDTs should be considered the treatment of first choice.

Traditionally, KDTs weren’t recommended for children younger than age 2 years. There were concerns that maintaining ketosis and meeting growth requirements were contradictory goals. That’s no longer believed to be so. Indeed, current evidence shows that KDT is highly effective and well tolerated in infants with refractory epilepsy. European guidelines address patient selection, pre-KDT counseling, preferred methods of initiation and KDT discontinuation, and other key issues (Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2016 Nov;20[6]:798-809).

The guidelines recognize four major, well-studied types of KDT: the classic long-chain triglyceride-centric diet; the medium-chain triglyceride diet; the more user-friendly modified Atkins diet; and low glycemic index therapy. Except in children younger than 2 years old, who should be started on the classic KDT, the consensus panel recommended that the specific KDT selected should be based on the family and child situation and the expertise at the local KDT center. Perceived differences in efficacy between the diets aren’t supported by persuasive evidence.
 

KDT benefits beyond seizure control

“Most of us who work in the diet scene are aware that patients often report increased alertness, and sometimes improved cognition,” said Dr. Sharma.

That subjective experience is now supported by evidence from a randomized, controlled trial. Dutch investigators who randomized 50 drug-refractory pediatric epilepsy patients to KDT or usual care documented a positive impact of the diet therapy on cognitive activation, mood, and anxious behavior (Epilepsy Behav. 2016 Jul;60:153-7).

More recently, a systematic review showed that while subjective assessments support claims of improved alertness, attention, and global cognition in patients on KDT for refractory epilepsy, structured neuropsychologic testing confirms the enhanced alertness but without significantly improved global cognition. The investigators reported that the improvements were unrelated to decreases in medication, the type of KDT or age at its introduction, or sleep improvement. Rather, the benefits appeared to be due to a combination of seizure reduction and direct effects of KDT on cognition (Epilepsy Behav. 2018 Oct;87:69-77).

There is also encouraging preliminary evidence of a possible protective effect of KDT against sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) in a mouse model (Epilepsia. 2016 Aug;57[8]:e178-82. doi: 10.1111/epi.13444).
 

The use of KDT in critical care settings

Investigators from the pediatric Status Epilepticus Research Group (pSERG) reported that 10 of 14 patients with convulsive refractory status epilepticus achieved EEG seizure resolution within 7 days after starting KDT. Moreover, 11 patients were able to be weaned off their continuous infusions within 14 days of starting KDT. Treatment-emergent gastroparesis and hypertriglyceridemia occurred in three patients (Epilepsy Res. 2018 Aug;144:1-6).

“It was reasonably well tolerated, but they started it quite late – a median of 13 days after onset of refractory status epilepticus. It should come much earlier on our list of therapies. We shouldn’t be waiting 2 weeks before going to the ketogenic diet, because we can diagnose refractory status epilepticus within 48 hours after arrival in the ICU most of the time,” Dr. Sharma said.

Austrian investigators have pioneered the use of intravenous KDT as a bridge when oral therapy is temporarily impossible because of status epilepticus, surgery, or other reasons. They reported that parental KDT with fat intake of 3.5-4 g/kg per day was safe and effective in their series of 17 young children with epilepsy (Epilepsia Open. 2017 Nov 16;3[1]:30-9).
 

The future: nonketogenic diet therapies

KDT in its various forms is just too demanding and restrictive for some patients. Nonketotic alternatives are being explored.

Triheptanoin is a synthetic medium-chain triglyceride in the form of an edible, odorless, tasteless oil. Its mechanism of action is by anaplerosis: that is, energy generation via replenishment of the tricarboxylic acid cycle. After demonstration of neuroprotective and anticonvulsant effects in several mouse models, Australian investigators conducted a pilot study of 30- to 100-mL/day of oral triheptanoin as add-on therapy in 12 children with drug-refractory epilepsy. Eight of the 12 took triheptanoin for longer than 12 weeks, and 5 of those 8 experienced a sustained greater than 50% reduction in seizure frequency, including 1 who remained seizure free for 30 weeks. Seven children had diarrhea or other GI side effects (Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2018 Nov;22[6]:1074-80).

Parisian investigators have developed a nonketotic, palatable combination of amino acids, carbohydrates, and fatty acids with a low ratio of fat to protein-plus-carbohydrates that provided potent protection against seizures in a mouse model. This suggests that the traditional 4:1 ratio sought in KDT isn’t necessary for robust seizure reduction (Sci Rep. 2017 Jul 14;7[1]:5496).

“This is probably going to be the future of nutritional therapy in epilepsy,” Dr. Sharma predicted.

She reported having no financial conflicts regarding her presentation.

[email protected]

BANGKOK – For a form of epilepsy treatment that’s been around since the 1920s, ketogenic diet therapy has lately been the focus of a surprising wealth of clinical research and development, Suvasini Sharma, MD, observed at the International Epilepsy Congress.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

This high-fat, low-carbohydrate diet is now well established as a valid and effective treatment option for children and adults with drug-refractory epilepsy who aren’t candidates for surgery. That’s about a third of all epilepsy patients. And as the recently overhauled pediatric ketogenic diet therapy (KDT) best practice consensus guidelines emphasize, KDT should be strongly considered after two antiepileptic drugs have failed, and even earlier for several epilepsy syndromes, noted Dr. Sharma, a pediatric neurologist at Lady Hardinge Medical College and Kalawati Saran Children’s Hospital in New Delhi, and a coauthor of the updated guidelines.

“The consensus guidelines recommend that you start thinking about the diet early, without waiting for every drug to fail,” she said at the congress, sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy.

Among the KDT-related topics she highlighted were the recently revised best practice consensus guidelines; an expanding role for KDT in infants, critical care settings, and in epileptic encephalopathies; mounting evidence that KDT provides additional benefits beyond seizure control; and promising new alternative diet therapies. She also described the challenges of using KDT in a low-resource nation such as India, where most of the 1.3 billion people shop in markets where food isn’t packaged with the nutritional content labels essential to traditional KDTs, and low literacy is common.


 

KDT best practice guidelines

The latest guidelines, which include the details of standardized KDT protocols as well as a summary of recent translational research into mechanisms of action, replace the previous 10-year-old version. Flexibility is now the watchword. While the classic KDT was started as an inpatient intervention involving several days of fasting followed by multiday gradual reintroduction of calories, that approach is now deemed optional (Epilepsia Open. 2018 May 21;3[2]:175-92).

“By and large, the trend now is going to nonfasting initiation on an outpatient basis, but with more stringent monitoring,” according to Dr. Sharma.

The guidelines note that while the research literature shows that, on average, KDT results in about a 50% chance of at least a 50% reduction in seizure frequency in patients with drug-refractory epilepsy, there are a dozen specific conditions with 70% or greater responder rates: infantile spasms, tuberous sclerosis, epilepsy with myoclonic-atonic seizures, Dravet syndrome, glucose transporter 1 deficiency syndrome (Glut 1DS), pyruvate dehydrogenase deficiency (PDHD), febrile infection-related epilepsy syndrome (FIRES), super-refractory status epilepticus (SRSE), Ohtahara syndrome, complex I mitochondrial disorders, Angelman syndrome, and children with gastrostomy tubes. For Glut1DS and PDHD, KDTs should be considered the treatment of first choice.

Traditionally, KDTs weren’t recommended for children younger than age 2 years. There were concerns that maintaining ketosis and meeting growth requirements were contradictory goals. That’s no longer believed to be so. Indeed, current evidence shows that KDT is highly effective and well tolerated in infants with refractory epilepsy. European guidelines address patient selection, pre-KDT counseling, preferred methods of initiation and KDT discontinuation, and other key issues (Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2016 Nov;20[6]:798-809).

The guidelines recognize four major, well-studied types of KDT: the classic long-chain triglyceride-centric diet; the medium-chain triglyceride diet; the more user-friendly modified Atkins diet; and low glycemic index therapy. Except in children younger than 2 years old, who should be started on the classic KDT, the consensus panel recommended that the specific KDT selected should be based on the family and child situation and the expertise at the local KDT center. Perceived differences in efficacy between the diets aren’t supported by persuasive evidence.
 

KDT benefits beyond seizure control

“Most of us who work in the diet scene are aware that patients often report increased alertness, and sometimes improved cognition,” said Dr. Sharma.

That subjective experience is now supported by evidence from a randomized, controlled trial. Dutch investigators who randomized 50 drug-refractory pediatric epilepsy patients to KDT or usual care documented a positive impact of the diet therapy on cognitive activation, mood, and anxious behavior (Epilepsy Behav. 2016 Jul;60:153-7).

More recently, a systematic review showed that while subjective assessments support claims of improved alertness, attention, and global cognition in patients on KDT for refractory epilepsy, structured neuropsychologic testing confirms the enhanced alertness but without significantly improved global cognition. The investigators reported that the improvements were unrelated to decreases in medication, the type of KDT or age at its introduction, or sleep improvement. Rather, the benefits appeared to be due to a combination of seizure reduction and direct effects of KDT on cognition (Epilepsy Behav. 2018 Oct;87:69-77).

There is also encouraging preliminary evidence of a possible protective effect of KDT against sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) in a mouse model (Epilepsia. 2016 Aug;57[8]:e178-82. doi: 10.1111/epi.13444).
 

The use of KDT in critical care settings

Investigators from the pediatric Status Epilepticus Research Group (pSERG) reported that 10 of 14 patients with convulsive refractory status epilepticus achieved EEG seizure resolution within 7 days after starting KDT. Moreover, 11 patients were able to be weaned off their continuous infusions within 14 days of starting KDT. Treatment-emergent gastroparesis and hypertriglyceridemia occurred in three patients (Epilepsy Res. 2018 Aug;144:1-6).

“It was reasonably well tolerated, but they started it quite late – a median of 13 days after onset of refractory status epilepticus. It should come much earlier on our list of therapies. We shouldn’t be waiting 2 weeks before going to the ketogenic diet, because we can diagnose refractory status epilepticus within 48 hours after arrival in the ICU most of the time,” Dr. Sharma said.

Austrian investigators have pioneered the use of intravenous KDT as a bridge when oral therapy is temporarily impossible because of status epilepticus, surgery, or other reasons. They reported that parental KDT with fat intake of 3.5-4 g/kg per day was safe and effective in their series of 17 young children with epilepsy (Epilepsia Open. 2017 Nov 16;3[1]:30-9).
 

The future: nonketogenic diet therapies

KDT in its various forms is just too demanding and restrictive for some patients. Nonketotic alternatives are being explored.

Triheptanoin is a synthetic medium-chain triglyceride in the form of an edible, odorless, tasteless oil. Its mechanism of action is by anaplerosis: that is, energy generation via replenishment of the tricarboxylic acid cycle. After demonstration of neuroprotective and anticonvulsant effects in several mouse models, Australian investigators conducted a pilot study of 30- to 100-mL/day of oral triheptanoin as add-on therapy in 12 children with drug-refractory epilepsy. Eight of the 12 took triheptanoin for longer than 12 weeks, and 5 of those 8 experienced a sustained greater than 50% reduction in seizure frequency, including 1 who remained seizure free for 30 weeks. Seven children had diarrhea or other GI side effects (Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2018 Nov;22[6]:1074-80).

Parisian investigators have developed a nonketotic, palatable combination of amino acids, carbohydrates, and fatty acids with a low ratio of fat to protein-plus-carbohydrates that provided potent protection against seizures in a mouse model. This suggests that the traditional 4:1 ratio sought in KDT isn’t necessary for robust seizure reduction (Sci Rep. 2017 Jul 14;7[1]:5496).

“This is probably going to be the future of nutritional therapy in epilepsy,” Dr. Sharma predicted.

She reported having no financial conflicts regarding her presentation.

[email protected]

PHILADELPHIA – U.S. children and teens who were hospitalized because of asthma had twice the rate of migraine headache when compared with a similar pediatric population without asthma. The finding is based on an analysis of more than 11 million U.S. pediatric hospitalizations over the course of a decade.

Among children and adolescents aged 3-21 years who were hospitalized for asthma, migraine rates were significantly higher among girls, adolescents, and whites, compared with boys, children aged 12 years or younger, and nonwhites, respectively, in a trio of adjusted analyses, Riddhiben S. Patel, MD, and associates reported in a poster at the annual meeting of the American Headache Society.

“Our hope is that, by establishing an association between childhood asthma and migraine, [these children] may be more easily screened for, diagnosed, and treated early by providers,” wrote Dr. Patel, a pediatric neurologist and headache specialist at the University of Mississippi, Jackson, and associates.

Their analysis used administrative billing data collected by the Kids’ Inpatient Database, maintained by the U.S. Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. The project includes a representative national sample of about 3 million pediatric hospital discharges every 3 years. The study used data from 11,483,103 hospitalizations of children and adolescents aged 3-21 years during 2003, 2006, 2009, and 2012, and found an overall hospitalization rate of 0.8% billed for migraine. For patients also hospitalized with a billing code for asthma, the rate jumped to 1.36%, a 120% statistically significant relative increase in migraine hospitalizations after adjustment for baseline demographic differences, the researchers said.

Among the children and adolescents hospitalized with an asthma billing code, the relative rate of also having a billing code for migraine after adjustment was a statistically significant 80% higher in girls, compared with boys, a statistically significant 7% higher in adolescents, compared with children 12 years or younger, and was significantly reduced by a relative 45% rate in nonwhites, compared with whites.

The mechanisms behind these associations are not known, but could involve mast-cell degranulation, autonomic dysfunction, or shared genetic or environmental etiologic factors, the authors said.

Dr. Patel reported no relevant disclosures.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Patel RS et al. Headache. 2019 June;59[S1]:1-208, Abstract P78.

PHILADELPHIA – U.S. children and teens who were hospitalized because of asthma had twice the rate of migraine headache when compared with a similar pediatric population without asthma. The finding is based on an analysis of more than 11 million U.S. pediatric hospitalizations over the course of a decade.

Among children and adolescents aged 3-21 years who were hospitalized for asthma, migraine rates were significantly higher among girls, adolescents, and whites, compared with boys, children aged 12 years or younger, and nonwhites, respectively, in a trio of adjusted analyses, Riddhiben S. Patel, MD, and associates reported in a poster at the annual meeting of the American Headache Society.

“Our hope is that, by establishing an association between childhood asthma and migraine, [these children] may be more easily screened for, diagnosed, and treated early by providers,” wrote Dr. Patel, a pediatric neurologist and headache specialist at the University of Mississippi, Jackson, and associates.

Their analysis used administrative billing data collected by the Kids’ Inpatient Database, maintained by the U.S. Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. The project includes a representative national sample of about 3 million pediatric hospital discharges every 3 years. The study used data from 11,483,103 hospitalizations of children and adolescents aged 3-21 years during 2003, 2006, 2009, and 2012, and found an overall hospitalization rate of 0.8% billed for migraine. For patients also hospitalized with a billing code for asthma, the rate jumped to 1.36%, a 120% statistically significant relative increase in migraine hospitalizations after adjustment for baseline demographic differences, the researchers said.

Among the children and adolescents hospitalized with an asthma billing code, the relative rate of also having a billing code for migraine after adjustment was a statistically significant 80% higher in girls, compared with boys, a statistically significant 7% higher in adolescents, compared with children 12 years or younger, and was significantly reduced by a relative 45% rate in nonwhites, compared with whites.

The mechanisms behind these associations are not known, but could involve mast-cell degranulation, autonomic dysfunction, or shared genetic or environmental etiologic factors, the authors said.

Dr. Patel reported no relevant disclosures.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Patel RS et al. Headache. 2019 June;59[S1]:1-208, Abstract P78.

PHILADELPHIA – U.S. children and teens who were hospitalized because of asthma had twice the rate of migraine headache when compared with a similar pediatric population without asthma. The finding is based on an analysis of more than 11 million U.S. pediatric hospitalizations over the course of a decade.

Among children and adolescents aged 3-21 years who were hospitalized for asthma, migraine rates were significantly higher among girls, adolescents, and whites, compared with boys, children aged 12 years or younger, and nonwhites, respectively, in a trio of adjusted analyses, Riddhiben S. Patel, MD, and associates reported in a poster at the annual meeting of the American Headache Society.

“Our hope is that, by establishing an association between childhood asthma and migraine, [these children] may be more easily screened for, diagnosed, and treated early by providers,” wrote Dr. Patel, a pediatric neurologist and headache specialist at the University of Mississippi, Jackson, and associates.

Their analysis used administrative billing data collected by the Kids’ Inpatient Database, maintained by the U.S. Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. The project includes a representative national sample of about 3 million pediatric hospital discharges every 3 years. The study used data from 11,483,103 hospitalizations of children and adolescents aged 3-21 years during 2003, 2006, 2009, and 2012, and found an overall hospitalization rate of 0.8% billed for migraine. For patients also hospitalized with a billing code for asthma, the rate jumped to 1.36%, a 120% statistically significant relative increase in migraine hospitalizations after adjustment for baseline demographic differences, the researchers said.

Among the children and adolescents hospitalized with an asthma billing code, the relative rate of also having a billing code for migraine after adjustment was a statistically significant 80% higher in girls, compared with boys, a statistically significant 7% higher in adolescents, compared with children 12 years or younger, and was significantly reduced by a relative 45% rate in nonwhites, compared with whites.

The mechanisms behind these associations are not known, but could involve mast-cell degranulation, autonomic dysfunction, or shared genetic or environmental etiologic factors, the authors said.

Dr. Patel reported no relevant disclosures.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Patel RS et al. Headache. 2019 June;59[S1]:1-208, Abstract P78.

Philadelphia – At 1.5 hours after dosing, lasmiditan is associated with impaired simulated driving, according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Headache Society. This impairment coincides with the time of peak drug concentration and is resolved by 8 hours after dosing.

Eli Lilly

Lasmiditan, a 5-HT_1F receptor agonist, is under regulatory review as an acute treatment of migraine in adults. In two phase 3 trials, a significant proportion of participants who received the treatment were pain-free at 2 hours and free of their most bothersome symptom at 2 hours, compared with controls. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (dizziness, paresthesia, somnolence, fatigue, and hypoaesthesia) reflected the drug’s penetration of the CNS. Because CNS-related adverse events could affect a patient’s ability to drive, the effects of lasmiditan on simulated driving were studied, consistent with regulatory guidance.
 

Two studies in healthy participants

Eric Pearlman, MD, PhD, senior medical director for neuroscience, U.S. Medical Affairs, at Eli Lilly, and colleagues conducted two simulated driving studies with crossover designs. In the first study, the researchers randomized 90 healthy subjects (mean age, 34.9 years) to 50 mg, 100 mg, or 200 mg of lasmiditan; 1 mg of alprazolam (an active control); or placebo. After appropriate washout periods, participants received each treatment in random order. At 1.5 hours after each treatment, participants underwent a driving assessment using a driving simulator.

In the second study, Dr. Pearlman and colleagues randomized 68 healthy subjects (mean age, 32.8 years) to 100 mg or 200 mg of lasmiditan, 50 mg of diphenhydramine (an active control), or placebo. Participants underwent driving assessments at 8, 12, and 24 hours after baseline. Participants randomized to lasmiditan received treatment at baseline, but participants randomized to diphenhydramine received treatment 2 hours before each driving assessment. The diphenhydramine arm was intended to test the sensitivity of the driving assessment to impairment, as was the alprazolam arm in the first study.

During the driving assessments, participants were asked to maintain a speed of 100 km/h and to stay in the middle of the lane. The simulated road included gentle curves and hills, and oncoming traffic appeared occasionally. Participants also completed a secondary attention task, mimicking real-world conditions. Each assessment took about 1 hour. The primary endpoint was the standard deviation of lateral position (SDLP), which is known colloquially as weaving. The investigators defined noninferiority to placebo as an SDLP of 4.4 cm or less.
 

Participants reported that they could drive safely

In the first study, Dr. Pearlman and colleagues reported a dose-related increase in SDLP at 1.5 hours post treatment. All three doses of lasmiditan were inferior to placebo, in terms of their effect on SDLP. In the second study, both doses of lasmiditan were noninferior to placebo at 8 hours, 12 hours, and 24 hours. In both studies, the positive control confirmed the assay’s sensitivity to driving impairment. Secondary endpoints in the second study did not indicate an association between lasmiditan and clinically meaningful driving impairment at 8, 12, and 24 hours after dosing.

Single oral doses of lasmiditan were absorbed rapidly. The median time to peak concentration was approximately 2 hours, and the mean elimination half-life was about 4.25 hours. Exposure to lasmiditan was approximately dose proportional.

Before each driving assessment, investigators asked participants, “Do you feel safe to drive?” Depending on the dose, 55%-80% of participants responded affirmatively, but the majority of participants had clinically meaningful changes in SDLP. “This [result] is consistent with the FDA guidance in the literature that subject perception of safety to drive is faulty and supports the need for formal driving assessments,” said Dr. Pearlman.

Dizziness, somnolence, and headache were the most common adverse events in the study, and this result was similar to those of the phase 3 trials. Most of the adverse events were of mild to moderate severity.
 

Questions for further study

Among the questions that future research could address is whether the lasmiditan-related effects seen in these studies in healthy subjects are similar to those in patients with migraine when lasmiditan is taken to treat a migraine attack, said Dr. Pearlman. Another open question is whether migraine has ictal and interictal effects on driving performance.

Eli Lilly, which has developed lasmiditan, sponsored the studies. Dr. Pearlman and several of coinvestigators are employees of the company.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Pearlman E et al. AHS 2019, Abstract IOR06.

Philadelphia – At 1.5 hours after dosing, lasmiditan is associated with impaired simulated driving, according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Headache Society. This impairment coincides with the time of peak drug concentration and is resolved by 8 hours after dosing.

Eli Lilly

Lasmiditan, a 5-HT_1F receptor agonist, is under regulatory review as an acute treatment of migraine in adults. In two phase 3 trials, a significant proportion of participants who received the treatment were pain-free at 2 hours and free of their most bothersome symptom at 2 hours, compared with controls. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (dizziness, paresthesia, somnolence, fatigue, and hypoaesthesia) reflected the drug’s penetration of the CNS. Because CNS-related adverse events could affect a patient’s ability to drive, the effects of lasmiditan on simulated driving were studied, consistent with regulatory guidance.
 

Two studies in healthy participants

Eric Pearlman, MD, PhD, senior medical director for neuroscience, U.S. Medical Affairs, at Eli Lilly, and colleagues conducted two simulated driving studies with crossover designs. In the first study, the researchers randomized 90 healthy subjects (mean age, 34.9 years) to 50 mg, 100 mg, or 200 mg of lasmiditan; 1 mg of alprazolam (an active control); or placebo. After appropriate washout periods, participants received each treatment in random order. At 1.5 hours after each treatment, participants underwent a driving assessment using a driving simulator.

In the second study, Dr. Pearlman and colleagues randomized 68 healthy subjects (mean age, 32.8 years) to 100 mg or 200 mg of lasmiditan, 50 mg of diphenhydramine (an active control), or placebo. Participants underwent driving assessments at 8, 12, and 24 hours after baseline. Participants randomized to lasmiditan received treatment at baseline, but participants randomized to diphenhydramine received treatment 2 hours before each driving assessment. The diphenhydramine arm was intended to test the sensitivity of the driving assessment to impairment, as was the alprazolam arm in the first study.

During the driving assessments, participants were asked to maintain a speed of 100 km/h and to stay in the middle of the lane. The simulated road included gentle curves and hills, and oncoming traffic appeared occasionally. Participants also completed a secondary attention task, mimicking real-world conditions. Each assessment took about 1 hour. The primary endpoint was the standard deviation of lateral position (SDLP), which is known colloquially as weaving. The investigators defined noninferiority to placebo as an SDLP of 4.4 cm or less.
 

Participants reported that they could drive safely

In the first study, Dr. Pearlman and colleagues reported a dose-related increase in SDLP at 1.5 hours post treatment. All three doses of lasmiditan were inferior to placebo, in terms of their effect on SDLP. In the second study, both doses of lasmiditan were noninferior to placebo at 8 hours, 12 hours, and 24 hours. In both studies, the positive control confirmed the assay’s sensitivity to driving impairment. Secondary endpoints in the second study did not indicate an association between lasmiditan and clinically meaningful driving impairment at 8, 12, and 24 hours after dosing.

Single oral doses of lasmiditan were absorbed rapidly. The median time to peak concentration was approximately 2 hours, and the mean elimination half-life was about 4.25 hours. Exposure to lasmiditan was approximately dose proportional.

Before each driving assessment, investigators asked participants, “Do you feel safe to drive?” Depending on the dose, 55%-80% of participants responded affirmatively, but the majority of participants had clinically meaningful changes in SDLP. “This [result] is consistent with the FDA guidance in the literature that subject perception of safety to drive is faulty and supports the need for formal driving assessments,” said Dr. Pearlman.

Dizziness, somnolence, and headache were the most common adverse events in the study, and this result was similar to those of the phase 3 trials. Most of the adverse events were of mild to moderate severity.
 

Questions for further study

Among the questions that future research could address is whether the lasmiditan-related effects seen in these studies in healthy subjects are similar to those in patients with migraine when lasmiditan is taken to treat a migraine attack, said Dr. Pearlman. Another open question is whether migraine has ictal and interictal effects on driving performance.

Eli Lilly, which has developed lasmiditan, sponsored the studies. Dr. Pearlman and several of coinvestigators are employees of the company.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Pearlman E et al. AHS 2019, Abstract IOR06.

Philadelphia – At 1.5 hours after dosing, lasmiditan is associated with impaired simulated driving, according to research presented at the annual meeting of the American Headache Society. This impairment coincides with the time of peak drug concentration and is resolved by 8 hours after dosing.

Eli Lilly

Lasmiditan, a 5-HT_1F receptor agonist, is under regulatory review as an acute treatment of migraine in adults. In two phase 3 trials, a significant proportion of participants who received the treatment were pain-free at 2 hours and free of their most bothersome symptom at 2 hours, compared with controls. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (dizziness, paresthesia, somnolence, fatigue, and hypoaesthesia) reflected the drug’s penetration of the CNS. Because CNS-related adverse events could affect a patient’s ability to drive, the effects of lasmiditan on simulated driving were studied, consistent with regulatory guidance.
 

Two studies in healthy participants

Eric Pearlman, MD, PhD, senior medical director for neuroscience, U.S. Medical Affairs, at Eli Lilly, and colleagues conducted two simulated driving studies with crossover designs. In the first study, the researchers randomized 90 healthy subjects (mean age, 34.9 years) to 50 mg, 100 mg, or 200 mg of lasmiditan; 1 mg of alprazolam (an active control); or placebo. After appropriate washout periods, participants received each treatment in random order. At 1.5 hours after each treatment, participants underwent a driving assessment using a driving simulator.

In the second study, Dr. Pearlman and colleagues randomized 68 healthy subjects (mean age, 32.8 years) to 100 mg or 200 mg of lasmiditan, 50 mg of diphenhydramine (an active control), or placebo. Participants underwent driving assessments at 8, 12, and 24 hours after baseline. Participants randomized to lasmiditan received treatment at baseline, but participants randomized to diphenhydramine received treatment 2 hours before each driving assessment. The diphenhydramine arm was intended to test the sensitivity of the driving assessment to impairment, as was the alprazolam arm in the first study.

During the driving assessments, participants were asked to maintain a speed of 100 km/h and to stay in the middle of the lane. The simulated road included gentle curves and hills, and oncoming traffic appeared occasionally. Participants also completed a secondary attention task, mimicking real-world conditions. Each assessment took about 1 hour. The primary endpoint was the standard deviation of lateral position (SDLP), which is known colloquially as weaving. The investigators defined noninferiority to placebo as an SDLP of 4.4 cm or less.
 

Participants reported that they could drive safely

In the first study, Dr. Pearlman and colleagues reported a dose-related increase in SDLP at 1.5 hours post treatment. All three doses of lasmiditan were inferior to placebo, in terms of their effect on SDLP. In the second study, both doses of lasmiditan were noninferior to placebo at 8 hours, 12 hours, and 24 hours. In both studies, the positive control confirmed the assay’s sensitivity to driving impairment. Secondary endpoints in the second study did not indicate an association between lasmiditan and clinically meaningful driving impairment at 8, 12, and 24 hours after dosing.

Single oral doses of lasmiditan were absorbed rapidly. The median time to peak concentration was approximately 2 hours, and the mean elimination half-life was about 4.25 hours. Exposure to lasmiditan was approximately dose proportional.

Before each driving assessment, investigators asked participants, “Do you feel safe to drive?” Depending on the dose, 55%-80% of participants responded affirmatively, but the majority of participants had clinically meaningful changes in SDLP. “This [result] is consistent with the FDA guidance in the literature that subject perception of safety to drive is faulty and supports the need for formal driving assessments,” said Dr. Pearlman.

Dizziness, somnolence, and headache were the most common adverse events in the study, and this result was similar to those of the phase 3 trials. Most of the adverse events were of mild to moderate severity.
 

Questions for further study

Among the questions that future research could address is whether the lasmiditan-related effects seen in these studies in healthy subjects are similar to those in patients with migraine when lasmiditan is taken to treat a migraine attack, said Dr. Pearlman. Another open question is whether migraine has ictal and interictal effects on driving performance.

Eli Lilly, which has developed lasmiditan, sponsored the studies. Dr. Pearlman and several of coinvestigators are employees of the company.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Pearlman E et al. AHS 2019, Abstract IOR06.

PHILADELPHIA – Among patients with episodic cluster headache, the use of acute medications is high, but the use of preventive medications is low, according to an analysis presented at the annual meeting of the American Headache Society.

Although consensus treatment guidelines do not exist for episodic cluster headache, treatment of this disorder did not follow many established recommendations that call for the use of preventive medications (e.g., MacGregor et al., 2010; Sarchielli et al., 2012; and May et al., 2006). Additional preventive medication options may be needed.

Patients with episodic cluster headache have several unilateral headache attacks per day. Little information is available to guide the selection of treatments for this population, and little is known about how available treatments are used in routine practice.
 

Analyzing cross-sectional survey data

To address this paucity of evidence, Jeffrey Scott Andrews, PharmD, a senior research scientist at Eli Lilly in Indianapolis, and colleagues examined data from the Adelphi 2017 Cluster Headache Disease Specific Programme, a large, international, cross-sectional survey. Physicians and patients in Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States responded to the survey. Eligible physicians consulted with at least four patients with cluster headache per month, and eligible patients had a diagnosis of episodic cluster headache that was consistent with ICHD-3 beta criteria. Additional data were collected from all participants through questionnaires.

The analysis included 309 patients in Germany, 328 in the United Kingdom, and 375 in the United States. The average age of the patients was 40 years, and most of the patients were male. Less than 70% of patients reported working full time, which may indicate “the impact of this condition on work status,” said Dr. Andrews. Patients’ average number of attacks per day within an active period was 2.4. The two most commonly reported comorbidities were anxiety and depression. About 40% of cases of depression were reported to have occurred after the receipt of a diagnosis of cluster headache.
 

Use of inhaled oxygen was low

Most patients received acute treatments. The proportion of patients who received acute therapy only was 53% in Germany, 48% in the United Kingdom, and 43% in the United States. Approximately 34% of patients in Germany received a combination of acute and preventive therapy, compared with 37% in the United Kingdom and 42% in the United States. The proportion of patients who received preventive therapy only was 10% in Germany, 8% in the United Kingdom, and 12% in the United States.

The most commonly prescribed acute treatment, regardless of formulation, was sumatriptan. About 60% of patients received this medication. Less than one-third of patients used inhaled oxygen. Oxygen was prescribed more often in Germany (45%) and the United Kingdom (33%), compared with the United States (19%). U.S. patients face well-known obstacles in getting access to, and reimbursement for, oxygen, said Dr. Andrews. “That’s an area that deserves increased attention.” Zolmitriptan was the third most commonly prescribed acute medication.

Among prescriptions for sumatriptan, oral and injectable formulations were approximately equally common. Recommendations, however, indicate formulations with potentially fast onset of action. “The average duration of one of these attacks is between 15 and 180 minutes, so that certainly suggests that a formulation that gives you a faster onset of action might improve outcomes,” said Dr. Andrews. The use of injectable sumatriptan was lowest in the United States and highest in the United Kingdom.

“The most common decision regarding preventive treatment was [to give] no preventive treatment,” said Dr. Andrews. Verapamil was the most commonly prescribed preventive therapy (34% in Germany, 29% in the United States, and 25% in the United Kingdom), followed by topiramate, lithium, and valproate.
 

Nonadherence and noncompliance was common

Fewer U.K. patients (32%) reported taking their preventive therapy as advised, compared with German patients (60%) and U.S. patients (80%). Common reasons for noncompliance, regardless of location, were forgetfulness, the belief that a dose was not needed, and side effects. Most patients in the United Kingdom (60%) and the United States (54%) reported the need to take an extra dose of their acute medication to relieve pain symptoms, compared with 30% in Germany. Furthermore, 13% of U.S. patients indicated that they took extra doses all the time or nearly all the time, compared with 2% in Germany and 7% in the United Kingdom. Among patients who had discontinued a preventive treatment in the past, the most common reasons for discontinuation were lack of efficacy and problems with tolerability.

One limitation of the study was that the survey was not designed to represent the general cluster headache or treating physician populations fully. The data may reflect selection bias in favor of physicians who treat high volumes of patients and in favor of patients who frequently seek health care. In addition, the data were based on self-reports.

“Increased awareness and educational efforts that aim at promoting the need and benefit of the preventive treatment for these patients is warranted,” Dr. Andrews concluded.

Dr. Andrews is an employee of Eli Lilly, which funded the study.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Nichols R et al. AHS 2019. Abstract OR04.

PHILADELPHIA – Among patients with episodic cluster headache, the use of acute medications is high, but the use of preventive medications is low, according to an analysis presented at the annual meeting of the American Headache Society.

Although consensus treatment guidelines do not exist for episodic cluster headache, treatment of this disorder did not follow many established recommendations that call for the use of preventive medications (e.g., MacGregor et al., 2010; Sarchielli et al., 2012; and May et al., 2006). Additional preventive medication options may be needed.

Patients with episodic cluster headache have several unilateral headache attacks per day. Little information is available to guide the selection of treatments for this population, and little is known about how available treatments are used in routine practice.
 

Analyzing cross-sectional survey data

To address this paucity of evidence, Jeffrey Scott Andrews, PharmD, a senior research scientist at Eli Lilly in Indianapolis, and colleagues examined data from the Adelphi 2017 Cluster Headache Disease Specific Programme, a large, international, cross-sectional survey. Physicians and patients in Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States responded to the survey. Eligible physicians consulted with at least four patients with cluster headache per month, and eligible patients had a diagnosis of episodic cluster headache that was consistent with ICHD-3 beta criteria. Additional data were collected from all participants through questionnaires.

The analysis included 309 patients in Germany, 328 in the United Kingdom, and 375 in the United States. The average age of the patients was 40 years, and most of the patients were male. Less than 70% of patients reported working full time, which may indicate “the impact of this condition on work status,” said Dr. Andrews. Patients’ average number of attacks per day within an active period was 2.4. The two most commonly reported comorbidities were anxiety and depression. About 40% of cases of depression were reported to have occurred after the receipt of a diagnosis of cluster headache.
 

Use of inhaled oxygen was low

Most patients received acute treatments. The proportion of patients who received acute therapy only was 53% in Germany, 48% in the United Kingdom, and 43% in the United States. Approximately 34% of patients in Germany received a combination of acute and preventive therapy, compared with 37% in the United Kingdom and 42% in the United States. The proportion of patients who received preventive therapy only was 10% in Germany, 8% in the United Kingdom, and 12% in the United States.

The most commonly prescribed acute treatment, regardless of formulation, was sumatriptan. About 60% of patients received this medication. Less than one-third of patients used inhaled oxygen. Oxygen was prescribed more often in Germany (45%) and the United Kingdom (33%), compared with the United States (19%). U.S. patients face well-known obstacles in getting access to, and reimbursement for, oxygen, said Dr. Andrews. “That’s an area that deserves increased attention.” Zolmitriptan was the third most commonly prescribed acute medication.

Among prescriptions for sumatriptan, oral and injectable formulations were approximately equally common. Recommendations, however, indicate formulations with potentially fast onset of action. “The average duration of one of these attacks is between 15 and 180 minutes, so that certainly suggests that a formulation that gives you a faster onset of action might improve outcomes,” said Dr. Andrews. The use of injectable sumatriptan was lowest in the United States and highest in the United Kingdom.

“The most common decision regarding preventive treatment was [to give] no preventive treatment,” said Dr. Andrews. Verapamil was the most commonly prescribed preventive therapy (34% in Germany, 29% in the United States, and 25% in the United Kingdom), followed by topiramate, lithium, and valproate.
 

Nonadherence and noncompliance was common

Fewer U.K. patients (32%) reported taking their preventive therapy as advised, compared with German patients (60%) and U.S. patients (80%). Common reasons for noncompliance, regardless of location, were forgetfulness, the belief that a dose was not needed, and side effects. Most patients in the United Kingdom (60%) and the United States (54%) reported the need to take an extra dose of their acute medication to relieve pain symptoms, compared with 30% in Germany. Furthermore, 13% of U.S. patients indicated that they took extra doses all the time or nearly all the time, compared with 2% in Germany and 7% in the United Kingdom. Among patients who had discontinued a preventive treatment in the past, the most common reasons for discontinuation were lack of efficacy and problems with tolerability.

One limitation of the study was that the survey was not designed to represent the general cluster headache or treating physician populations fully. The data may reflect selection bias in favor of physicians who treat high volumes of patients and in favor of patients who frequently seek health care. In addition, the data were based on self-reports.

“Increased awareness and educational efforts that aim at promoting the need and benefit of the preventive treatment for these patients is warranted,” Dr. Andrews concluded.

Dr. Andrews is an employee of Eli Lilly, which funded the study.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Nichols R et al. AHS 2019. Abstract OR04.

PHILADELPHIA – Among patients with episodic cluster headache, the use of acute medications is high, but the use of preventive medications is low, according to an analysis presented at the annual meeting of the American Headache Society.

Although consensus treatment guidelines do not exist for episodic cluster headache, treatment of this disorder did not follow many established recommendations that call for the use of preventive medications (e.g., MacGregor et al., 2010; Sarchielli et al., 2012; and May et al., 2006). Additional preventive medication options may be needed.

Patients with episodic cluster headache have several unilateral headache attacks per day. Little information is available to guide the selection of treatments for this population, and little is known about how available treatments are used in routine practice.
 

Analyzing cross-sectional survey data

To address this paucity of evidence, Jeffrey Scott Andrews, PharmD, a senior research scientist at Eli Lilly in Indianapolis, and colleagues examined data from the Adelphi 2017 Cluster Headache Disease Specific Programme, a large, international, cross-sectional survey. Physicians and patients in Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States responded to the survey. Eligible physicians consulted with at least four patients with cluster headache per month, and eligible patients had a diagnosis of episodic cluster headache that was consistent with ICHD-3 beta criteria. Additional data were collected from all participants through questionnaires.

The analysis included 309 patients in Germany, 328 in the United Kingdom, and 375 in the United States. The average age of the patients was 40 years, and most of the patients were male. Less than 70% of patients reported working full time, which may indicate “the impact of this condition on work status,” said Dr. Andrews. Patients’ average number of attacks per day within an active period was 2.4. The two most commonly reported comorbidities were anxiety and depression. About 40% of cases of depression were reported to have occurred after the receipt of a diagnosis of cluster headache.
 

Use of inhaled oxygen was low

Most patients received acute treatments. The proportion of patients who received acute therapy only was 53% in Germany, 48% in the United Kingdom, and 43% in the United States. Approximately 34% of patients in Germany received a combination of acute and preventive therapy, compared with 37% in the United Kingdom and 42% in the United States. The proportion of patients who received preventive therapy only was 10% in Germany, 8% in the United Kingdom, and 12% in the United States.

The most commonly prescribed acute treatment, regardless of formulation, was sumatriptan. About 60% of patients received this medication. Less than one-third of patients used inhaled oxygen. Oxygen was prescribed more often in Germany (45%) and the United Kingdom (33%), compared with the United States (19%). U.S. patients face well-known obstacles in getting access to, and reimbursement for, oxygen, said Dr. Andrews. “That’s an area that deserves increased attention.” Zolmitriptan was the third most commonly prescribed acute medication.

Among prescriptions for sumatriptan, oral and injectable formulations were approximately equally common. Recommendations, however, indicate formulations with potentially fast onset of action. “The average duration of one of these attacks is between 15 and 180 minutes, so that certainly suggests that a formulation that gives you a faster onset of action might improve outcomes,” said Dr. Andrews. The use of injectable sumatriptan was lowest in the United States and highest in the United Kingdom.

“The most common decision regarding preventive treatment was [to give] no preventive treatment,” said Dr. Andrews. Verapamil was the most commonly prescribed preventive therapy (34% in Germany, 29% in the United States, and 25% in the United Kingdom), followed by topiramate, lithium, and valproate.
 

Nonadherence and noncompliance was common

Fewer U.K. patients (32%) reported taking their preventive therapy as advised, compared with German patients (60%) and U.S. patients (80%). Common reasons for noncompliance, regardless of location, were forgetfulness, the belief that a dose was not needed, and side effects. Most patients in the United Kingdom (60%) and the United States (54%) reported the need to take an extra dose of their acute medication to relieve pain symptoms, compared with 30% in Germany. Furthermore, 13% of U.S. patients indicated that they took extra doses all the time or nearly all the time, compared with 2% in Germany and 7% in the United Kingdom. Among patients who had discontinued a preventive treatment in the past, the most common reasons for discontinuation were lack of efficacy and problems with tolerability.

One limitation of the study was that the survey was not designed to represent the general cluster headache or treating physician populations fully. The data may reflect selection bias in favor of physicians who treat high volumes of patients and in favor of patients who frequently seek health care. In addition, the data were based on self-reports.

“Increased awareness and educational efforts that aim at promoting the need and benefit of the preventive treatment for these patients is warranted,” Dr. Andrews concluded.

Dr. Andrews is an employee of Eli Lilly, which funded the study.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Nichols R et al. AHS 2019. Abstract OR04.

BANGKOK – Electroconvulsive therapy is a safe and efficacious albeit off-label adjunctive therapy in adults with super-refractory status epilepticus of the NORSE subtype, Madeline Tuong-Vi Nguyen, MD, declared at the International Epilepsy Congress.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

“These were highly refractory patients and ECT did contribute to their status termination,” she reported at the congress, sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy.

Dr. Nguyen, a neurologist at Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, presented a single-center retrospective case series composed of four ECT-treated patients with NORSE (new onset refractory status epilepticus), three of whom experienced marked improvement in their seizure activity, including cessation of their status epilepticus, after completing a course of eight or nine ECT sessions.

A four-patient series may not seem to be compelling evidence, but it’s a significant contribution to the sparse literature regarding this off-label usage of ECT. Indeed, the biggest case series to date consists of eight patients treated at Indiana University, five of whom displayed neurotelemetry or clinical evidence of improvement within 24 hours after completing a full course of ECT (J ECT. 2018 Mar;34[1]:e5-e9. doi: 10.1097/YCT.0000000000000450).

And realistically, these small case series are as good as the supporting evidence is likely to get.

“It would be incredibly difficult to perform a randomized trial, and even a case-control study in such refractory patients would be quite difficult,” she observed.

Super-refractory status epilepticus is the term for seizures persisting despite 24 hours of adequate treatment with benzodiazepines, loading doses of antiepileptic drugs, and anesthetic agents for medically-induced coma, or for seizures that resume after withdrawal of general anesthesia. NORSE is defined as refractory status epilepticus without a history of seizures or a readily identifiable etiology. It is often associated with an autoimmune or paraneoplastic encephalitis. Outcomes are generally poor.

The four ECT-treated patients in the Oregon series were aged 27-48 years. Two had a prodromal viral illness, and a third had a vague prodrome but a negative infectious disease workup. Three patients were on four antiepileptic drugs at the time they began ECT, one was on seven. Two patients had generalized seizures, while the other two had both generalized and focal seizures. Two had normal brain MRI scans and the other two had abnormal MRIs. The patients had CSF white blood cell counts of 2, 5, 10, and 58 per mm³. All patients were on immunotherapy with intravenous corticosteroids, and three of the four were on additional immunomodulatory drugs.

ECT was started on a compassionate-use basis 16-49 days after hospital admission. These were patients who had run out of options, according to Dr. Nguyen.

Three of the four patients returned to consciousness after completing their course of ECT and withdrawal of their general anesthesia, with attenuation of their seizure activity and cessation of their super-refractory status epilepticus. Two of the three were discharged to a rehabilitation facility, including one who eventually could ambulate with slight assistance. Another patient died after discharge, while the fourth patient died during the initial hospital stay due to septic shock unrelated to the ECT.

At discharge, one patient had a modified Rankin Scale score (mRS) of 4, and two had a score of 5. At follow-up, two patients had a score of 3 and one was a 6.

Dr. Nguyen’s presentation met with undisguised audience skepticism.

“What is the theoretical basis to treat very severe epileptic seizures with another epileptic seizure? I mean, what made you do this?” one neurologist asked.

Dr. Nguyen replied that the mechanism of benefit isn’t clear. One possibility is enhanced inhibition of gamma-aminobutyric acid.

“When I describe ECT to the family, the way I think of it is as a hard reset. We tried burst suppression. This is an alternative approach,” she explained.

Another audience member said the treatment strategy smacks of homeopathy.

“These patients have a terrible disorder,” said session co-chair Gregory Krauss, MD. “Three of your four patients ultimately did not do very well.

“The question is, what are you really accomplishing in terms of the underlying encephalopathy and irritability that’s causing this? And are the seizures really a primary factor in their outcome? Is this treatment warranted to try to improve their overall outcome?” asked Dr. Krauss, professor of neurology at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore.

Dr. Nguyen answered that she can’t say if the seizures are the cause or result of the encephalopathy.

“ECT was done well into the patients’ admission. Our difficulty is that while we were able to stop the seizures, unfortunately we weren’t able to go back in time and save the brain that was lost due to the convulsive and nonconvulsive activity,” she said. Dr. Nguyen added that she and her coinvestigators are interested in exploring the possibility that utilizing ECT earlier might abort the super-refractory status epilepticus sooner and thereby result in better outcomes.

Still, she noted, three of the four patients were able to leave the hospital, and the two survivors show improved cognitive abilities at 51 and 100 months of follow-up.

Dr. Nguyen reported having no financial conflicts.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Nguyen MTV et al. IEC 2019, Abstract P031.

BANGKOK – Electroconvulsive therapy is a safe and efficacious albeit off-label adjunctive therapy in adults with super-refractory status epilepticus of the NORSE subtype, Madeline Tuong-Vi Nguyen, MD, declared at the International Epilepsy Congress.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

“These were highly refractory patients and ECT did contribute to their status termination,” she reported at the congress, sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy.

Dr. Nguyen, a neurologist at Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, presented a single-center retrospective case series composed of four ECT-treated patients with NORSE (new onset refractory status epilepticus), three of whom experienced marked improvement in their seizure activity, including cessation of their status epilepticus, after completing a course of eight or nine ECT sessions.

A four-patient series may not seem to be compelling evidence, but it’s a significant contribution to the sparse literature regarding this off-label usage of ECT. Indeed, the biggest case series to date consists of eight patients treated at Indiana University, five of whom displayed neurotelemetry or clinical evidence of improvement within 24 hours after completing a full course of ECT (J ECT. 2018 Mar;34[1]:e5-e9. doi: 10.1097/YCT.0000000000000450).

And realistically, these small case series are as good as the supporting evidence is likely to get.

“It would be incredibly difficult to perform a randomized trial, and even a case-control study in such refractory patients would be quite difficult,” she observed.

Super-refractory status epilepticus is the term for seizures persisting despite 24 hours of adequate treatment with benzodiazepines, loading doses of antiepileptic drugs, and anesthetic agents for medically-induced coma, or for seizures that resume after withdrawal of general anesthesia. NORSE is defined as refractory status epilepticus without a history of seizures or a readily identifiable etiology. It is often associated with an autoimmune or paraneoplastic encephalitis. Outcomes are generally poor.

The four ECT-treated patients in the Oregon series were aged 27-48 years. Two had a prodromal viral illness, and a third had a vague prodrome but a negative infectious disease workup. Three patients were on four antiepileptic drugs at the time they began ECT, one was on seven. Two patients had generalized seizures, while the other two had both generalized and focal seizures. Two had normal brain MRI scans and the other two had abnormal MRIs. The patients had CSF white blood cell counts of 2, 5, 10, and 58 per mm³. All patients were on immunotherapy with intravenous corticosteroids, and three of the four were on additional immunomodulatory drugs.

ECT was started on a compassionate-use basis 16-49 days after hospital admission. These were patients who had run out of options, according to Dr. Nguyen.

Three of the four patients returned to consciousness after completing their course of ECT and withdrawal of their general anesthesia, with attenuation of their seizure activity and cessation of their super-refractory status epilepticus. Two of the three were discharged to a rehabilitation facility, including one who eventually could ambulate with slight assistance. Another patient died after discharge, while the fourth patient died during the initial hospital stay due to septic shock unrelated to the ECT.

At discharge, one patient had a modified Rankin Scale score (mRS) of 4, and two had a score of 5. At follow-up, two patients had a score of 3 and one was a 6.

Dr. Nguyen’s presentation met with undisguised audience skepticism.

“What is the theoretical basis to treat very severe epileptic seizures with another epileptic seizure? I mean, what made you do this?” one neurologist asked.

Dr. Nguyen replied that the mechanism of benefit isn’t clear. One possibility is enhanced inhibition of gamma-aminobutyric acid.

“When I describe ECT to the family, the way I think of it is as a hard reset. We tried burst suppression. This is an alternative approach,” she explained.

Another audience member said the treatment strategy smacks of homeopathy.

“These patients have a terrible disorder,” said session co-chair Gregory Krauss, MD. “Three of your four patients ultimately did not do very well.

“The question is, what are you really accomplishing in terms of the underlying encephalopathy and irritability that’s causing this? And are the seizures really a primary factor in their outcome? Is this treatment warranted to try to improve their overall outcome?” asked Dr. Krauss, professor of neurology at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore.

Dr. Nguyen answered that she can’t say if the seizures are the cause or result of the encephalopathy.

“ECT was done well into the patients’ admission. Our difficulty is that while we were able to stop the seizures, unfortunately we weren’t able to go back in time and save the brain that was lost due to the convulsive and nonconvulsive activity,” she said. Dr. Nguyen added that she and her coinvestigators are interested in exploring the possibility that utilizing ECT earlier might abort the super-refractory status epilepticus sooner and thereby result in better outcomes.

Still, she noted, three of the four patients were able to leave the hospital, and the two survivors show improved cognitive abilities at 51 and 100 months of follow-up.

Dr. Nguyen reported having no financial conflicts.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Nguyen MTV et al. IEC 2019, Abstract P031.

BANGKOK – Electroconvulsive therapy is a safe and efficacious albeit off-label adjunctive therapy in adults with super-refractory status epilepticus of the NORSE subtype, Madeline Tuong-Vi Nguyen, MD, declared at the International Epilepsy Congress.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

“These were highly refractory patients and ECT did contribute to their status termination,” she reported at the congress, sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy.

Dr. Nguyen, a neurologist at Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, presented a single-center retrospective case series composed of four ECT-treated patients with NORSE (new onset refractory status epilepticus), three of whom experienced marked improvement in their seizure activity, including cessation of their status epilepticus, after completing a course of eight or nine ECT sessions.

A four-patient series may not seem to be compelling evidence, but it’s a significant contribution to the sparse literature regarding this off-label usage of ECT. Indeed, the biggest case series to date consists of eight patients treated at Indiana University, five of whom displayed neurotelemetry or clinical evidence of improvement within 24 hours after completing a full course of ECT (J ECT. 2018 Mar;34[1]:e5-e9. doi: 10.1097/YCT.0000000000000450).

And realistically, these small case series are as good as the supporting evidence is likely to get.

“It would be incredibly difficult to perform a randomized trial, and even a case-control study in such refractory patients would be quite difficult,” she observed.

Super-refractory status epilepticus is the term for seizures persisting despite 24 hours of adequate treatment with benzodiazepines, loading doses of antiepileptic drugs, and anesthetic agents for medically-induced coma, or for seizures that resume after withdrawal of general anesthesia. NORSE is defined as refractory status epilepticus without a history of seizures or a readily identifiable etiology. It is often associated with an autoimmune or paraneoplastic encephalitis. Outcomes are generally poor.

The four ECT-treated patients in the Oregon series were aged 27-48 years. Two had a prodromal viral illness, and a third had a vague prodrome but a negative infectious disease workup. Three patients were on four antiepileptic drugs at the time they began ECT, one was on seven. Two patients had generalized seizures, while the other two had both generalized and focal seizures. Two had normal brain MRI scans and the other two had abnormal MRIs. The patients had CSF white blood cell counts of 2, 5, 10, and 58 per mm³. All patients were on immunotherapy with intravenous corticosteroids, and three of the four were on additional immunomodulatory drugs.

ECT was started on a compassionate-use basis 16-49 days after hospital admission. These were patients who had run out of options, according to Dr. Nguyen.

Three of the four patients returned to consciousness after completing their course of ECT and withdrawal of their general anesthesia, with attenuation of their seizure activity and cessation of their super-refractory status epilepticus. Two of the three were discharged to a rehabilitation facility, including one who eventually could ambulate with slight assistance. Another patient died after discharge, while the fourth patient died during the initial hospital stay due to septic shock unrelated to the ECT.

At discharge, one patient had a modified Rankin Scale score (mRS) of 4, and two had a score of 5. At follow-up, two patients had a score of 3 and one was a 6.

Dr. Nguyen’s presentation met with undisguised audience skepticism.

“What is the theoretical basis to treat very severe epileptic seizures with another epileptic seizure? I mean, what made you do this?” one neurologist asked.

Dr. Nguyen replied that the mechanism of benefit isn’t clear. One possibility is enhanced inhibition of gamma-aminobutyric acid.

“When I describe ECT to the family, the way I think of it is as a hard reset. We tried burst suppression. This is an alternative approach,” she explained.

Another audience member said the treatment strategy smacks of homeopathy.

“These patients have a terrible disorder,” said session co-chair Gregory Krauss, MD. “Three of your four patients ultimately did not do very well.

“The question is, what are you really accomplishing in terms of the underlying encephalopathy and irritability that’s causing this? And are the seizures really a primary factor in their outcome? Is this treatment warranted to try to improve their overall outcome?” asked Dr. Krauss, professor of neurology at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore.

Dr. Nguyen answered that she can’t say if the seizures are the cause or result of the encephalopathy.

“ECT was done well into the patients’ admission. Our difficulty is that while we were able to stop the seizures, unfortunately we weren’t able to go back in time and save the brain that was lost due to the convulsive and nonconvulsive activity,” she said. Dr. Nguyen added that she and her coinvestigators are interested in exploring the possibility that utilizing ECT earlier might abort the super-refractory status epilepticus sooner and thereby result in better outcomes.

Still, she noted, three of the four patients were able to leave the hospital, and the two survivors show improved cognitive abilities at 51 and 100 months of follow-up.

Dr. Nguyen reported having no financial conflicts.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Nguyen MTV et al. IEC 2019, Abstract P031.

BANGKOK – The mortality rate is high in children with superrefractory status epilepticus, with fulminant cerebral edema emerging as the leading cause of death in a retrospective, single-center study presented by Maggie Lo Yee Yau, MD, at the International Epilepsy Congress.

“Death in these children usually occurred within the first few days after admission to the pediatric ICU,” she said at the congress sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

[email protected]

BANGKOK – The mortality rate is high in children with superrefractory status epilepticus, with fulminant cerebral edema emerging as the leading cause of death in a retrospective, single-center study presented by Maggie Lo Yee Yau, MD, at the International Epilepsy Congress.

“Death in these children usually occurred within the first few days after admission to the pediatric ICU,” she said at the congress sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

[email protected]

BANGKOK – The mortality rate is high in children with superrefractory status epilepticus, with fulminant cerebral edema emerging as the leading cause of death in a retrospective, single-center study presented by Maggie Lo Yee Yau, MD, at the International Epilepsy Congress.

“Death in these children usually occurred within the first few days after admission to the pediatric ICU,” she said at the congress sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

[email protected]

BANGKOK – Neonatal and early infantile epileptic syndromes are more common than previously thought, accounting for nearly one in six cases of severe epilepsies of infancy in a comprehensive Australian population-based study, Katherine B. Howell, MD, reported at the International Epilepsy Congress.

“This is an important finding. It’s a considerably larger number than might have been expected and likely has two contributing factors. Neonatal seizures were previously not considered epilepsy, so many previous studies excluded neonates and the conditions were underrecognized. And our large number of ictal EEGs allowed identification of ictal activation, which is a feature of EIMFS [epilepsy of infancy with migrating focal seizures]. Without those ictal recordings, the diagnosis of EIMFS may not have been made,” according to Dr. Howell, a neurologist at the Royal Children’s Hospital and University of Melbourne.

She presented a population-based study of all infants born with severe epilepsies of infancy (SEI) during a 2-year period in the Australian state of Victoria, which is considered an ideal environment for epidemiologic studies because government-funded health care is available to all. SEI was defined as seizures beginning before age 18 months, occurring at a rate of at least one per day for 1 week or weekly for 1 month, refractory to adequate trials of at least two antiepileptic drugs, and accompanied by an epileptiform EEG abnormality. Her focus was on the electroclinical phenotypes of the affected children because of the high clinical utility of this information.

“Assigning an epileptic syndrome is highly useful for clinician-to-clinician communication of an infant’s phenotype. It guides investigation of etiology and possibly selection of optimal therapy, such as steroids in West syndrome. And it can inform prognosis,” Dr. Howell said at the congress sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy.

She and her coinvestigators analyzed the detailed records of all 114 infants with SEI born during the study period. The incidence was 1 in 2,000 live births.

“Among infants with epilepsy, this patient group with SEI is most critical to better understand. Effective treatment is often not available, the seizure and developmental outcomes are frequently devastating, and the health burden massive,” the neurologist observed.

The full spectrum of SEI

With the help of ictal EEGs, home seizure recordings, MRI scans, and genomic testing, the investigators were able to classify more than 85% of the infants. About 64% had a prototypic syndrome at onset, such as West syndrome, which accounted for 33% of all SEI, or Dravet syndrome, which was diagnosed in 3%.

The prevalence of the prototypic neonatal and early infantile epileptic syndromes was notably higher than previously reported by others: EIMFS accounted for 9% of total SEI, early infantile epileptic encephalopathy (EIEE) for 7%, and early myoclonic encephalopathy (EME) for 2%. This translated to an incidence of 1 in 28,000 live births for EIEE, 1 in 111,000 for EME, and 1 in 22,500 for EIMFS.


“While neither EIEE nor EIMFS are common, these incidences are actually not that much lower than the reported incidence of Dravet syndrome,” the neurologist pointed out.

About 36% of SEI didn’t fit into any of the prototypic syndromes. However, more than half of this subgroup, or 19% of total SEI, were prototypic syndrome like, a designation Dr. Howell and her coworkers used for cases that possessed most but not all of the well-recognized features of a particular prototypic syndrome; for example, West syndrome–like seizures but without hypsarrhythmia. Whether these prototypic syndrome-like SEI have etiologies and outcomes similar to or distinct from the prototypic syndromes remains a topic for further study.

SEI etiologies

A total of 14 patients had SEI because of an acquired syndrome attributed to brain injury, 31 were because of brain malformation, 21 involved single gene disorders, 9 were of chromosomal etiology, and 7 had a metabolic cause.

The key finding with regard to etiology was the glaring difference between children with West syndrome, its variants, or unifocal epilepsies as compared with the rest of the SEI patients. Those with West syndrome, a West syndrome–like designation, or unifocal epilepsies most commonly had a structural etiology for their SEI. Indeed, of the 52 children with West syndrome or a variant, 10 had an acquired brain injury as their etiology and 17 had a brain malformation. And of the 12 patients with unifocal SEI, 1 had a brain injury and 9 had brain malformations.

In contrast, children with neonatal or early infantile epileptic syndromes had predominantly genetic rather than structural etiologies. Of the 20 children with EIEE, EIMFS, or EME, none had brain injury as the etiology, only 1 had a brain malformation, but 9 had a single gene or chromosomal etiology.

Outcomes

“The outcome data highlight the extreme severity of SEI and the imperative for novel treatments: 16% mortality overall, so one in six was deceased by age 2 years. The infants who died after the neonatal period all had profound delays, and almost all had ongoing seizures until their death. Most survivors also had developmental delay, with severity ranging from mild to moderate in 49% to severe/profound in 41%. Just 10 of 114 children had normal development,” Dr. Howell reported.

However, there was a notable difference in outcomes between the various syndromes, and this information is highly relevant prognostically. Of the 20 children with neonatal and early infantile epileptic syndromes, 11 died and the other 9 had profound developmental delay. In contrast, the outlook was far better for children with West syndrome, West syndrome–like variants, or focal epilepsies: Among 64 affected patients, there were just 2 deaths, normal development in 9 patients, mild to moderate developmental delay in 34, and severe/profound delay in 19.

Dr. Howell reported having no financial conflicts regarding this study, which was supported by governmental research grants.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Howell KB et al. IEC 2019, Abstract P053.

BANGKOK – Neonatal and early infantile epileptic syndromes are more common than previously thought, accounting for nearly one in six cases of severe epilepsies of infancy in a comprehensive Australian population-based study, Katherine B. Howell, MD, reported at the International Epilepsy Congress.

“This is an important finding. It’s a considerably larger number than might have been expected and likely has two contributing factors. Neonatal seizures were previously not considered epilepsy, so many previous studies excluded neonates and the conditions were underrecognized. And our large number of ictal EEGs allowed identification of ictal activation, which is a feature of EIMFS [epilepsy of infancy with migrating focal seizures]. Without those ictal recordings, the diagnosis of EIMFS may not have been made,” according to Dr. Howell, a neurologist at the Royal Children’s Hospital and University of Melbourne.

She presented a population-based study of all infants born with severe epilepsies of infancy (SEI) during a 2-year period in the Australian state of Victoria, which is considered an ideal environment for epidemiologic studies because government-funded health care is available to all. SEI was defined as seizures beginning before age 18 months, occurring at a rate of at least one per day for 1 week or weekly for 1 month, refractory to adequate trials of at least two antiepileptic drugs, and accompanied by an epileptiform EEG abnormality. Her focus was on the electroclinical phenotypes of the affected children because of the high clinical utility of this information.

“Assigning an epileptic syndrome is highly useful for clinician-to-clinician communication of an infant’s phenotype. It guides investigation of etiology and possibly selection of optimal therapy, such as steroids in West syndrome. And it can inform prognosis,” Dr. Howell said at the congress sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy.

She and her coinvestigators analyzed the detailed records of all 114 infants with SEI born during the study period. The incidence was 1 in 2,000 live births.

“Among infants with epilepsy, this patient group with SEI is most critical to better understand. Effective treatment is often not available, the seizure and developmental outcomes are frequently devastating, and the health burden massive,” the neurologist observed.

The full spectrum of SEI

With the help of ictal EEGs, home seizure recordings, MRI scans, and genomic testing, the investigators were able to classify more than 85% of the infants. About 64% had a prototypic syndrome at onset, such as West syndrome, which accounted for 33% of all SEI, or Dravet syndrome, which was diagnosed in 3%.

The prevalence of the prototypic neonatal and early infantile epileptic syndromes was notably higher than previously reported by others: EIMFS accounted for 9% of total SEI, early infantile epileptic encephalopathy (EIEE) for 7%, and early myoclonic encephalopathy (EME) for 2%. This translated to an incidence of 1 in 28,000 live births for EIEE, 1 in 111,000 for EME, and 1 in 22,500 for EIMFS.


“While neither EIEE nor EIMFS are common, these incidences are actually not that much lower than the reported incidence of Dravet syndrome,” the neurologist pointed out.

About 36% of SEI didn’t fit into any of the prototypic syndromes. However, more than half of this subgroup, or 19% of total SEI, were prototypic syndrome like, a designation Dr. Howell and her coworkers used for cases that possessed most but not all of the well-recognized features of a particular prototypic syndrome; for example, West syndrome–like seizures but without hypsarrhythmia. Whether these prototypic syndrome-like SEI have etiologies and outcomes similar to or distinct from the prototypic syndromes remains a topic for further study.

SEI etiologies

A total of 14 patients had SEI because of an acquired syndrome attributed to brain injury, 31 were because of brain malformation, 21 involved single gene disorders, 9 were of chromosomal etiology, and 7 had a metabolic cause.

The key finding with regard to etiology was the glaring difference between children with West syndrome, its variants, or unifocal epilepsies as compared with the rest of the SEI patients. Those with West syndrome, a West syndrome–like designation, or unifocal epilepsies most commonly had a structural etiology for their SEI. Indeed, of the 52 children with West syndrome or a variant, 10 had an acquired brain injury as their etiology and 17 had a brain malformation. And of the 12 patients with unifocal SEI, 1 had a brain injury and 9 had brain malformations.

In contrast, children with neonatal or early infantile epileptic syndromes had predominantly genetic rather than structural etiologies. Of the 20 children with EIEE, EIMFS, or EME, none had brain injury as the etiology, only 1 had a brain malformation, but 9 had a single gene or chromosomal etiology.

Outcomes

“The outcome data highlight the extreme severity of SEI and the imperative for novel treatments: 16% mortality overall, so one in six was deceased by age 2 years. The infants who died after the neonatal period all had profound delays, and almost all had ongoing seizures until their death. Most survivors also had developmental delay, with severity ranging from mild to moderate in 49% to severe/profound in 41%. Just 10 of 114 children had normal development,” Dr. Howell reported.

However, there was a notable difference in outcomes between the various syndromes, and this information is highly relevant prognostically. Of the 20 children with neonatal and early infantile epileptic syndromes, 11 died and the other 9 had profound developmental delay. In contrast, the outlook was far better for children with West syndrome, West syndrome–like variants, or focal epilepsies: Among 64 affected patients, there were just 2 deaths, normal development in 9 patients, mild to moderate developmental delay in 34, and severe/profound delay in 19.

Dr. Howell reported having no financial conflicts regarding this study, which was supported by governmental research grants.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Howell KB et al. IEC 2019, Abstract P053.

BANGKOK – Neonatal and early infantile epileptic syndromes are more common than previously thought, accounting for nearly one in six cases of severe epilepsies of infancy in a comprehensive Australian population-based study, Katherine B. Howell, MD, reported at the International Epilepsy Congress.

“This is an important finding. It’s a considerably larger number than might have been expected and likely has two contributing factors. Neonatal seizures were previously not considered epilepsy, so many previous studies excluded neonates and the conditions were underrecognized. And our large number of ictal EEGs allowed identification of ictal activation, which is a feature of EIMFS [epilepsy of infancy with migrating focal seizures]. Without those ictal recordings, the diagnosis of EIMFS may not have been made,” according to Dr. Howell, a neurologist at the Royal Children’s Hospital and University of Melbourne.

She presented a population-based study of all infants born with severe epilepsies of infancy (SEI) during a 2-year period in the Australian state of Victoria, which is considered an ideal environment for epidemiologic studies because government-funded health care is available to all. SEI was defined as seizures beginning before age 18 months, occurring at a rate of at least one per day for 1 week or weekly for 1 month, refractory to adequate trials of at least two antiepileptic drugs, and accompanied by an epileptiform EEG abnormality. Her focus was on the electroclinical phenotypes of the affected children because of the high clinical utility of this information.

“Assigning an epileptic syndrome is highly useful for clinician-to-clinician communication of an infant’s phenotype. It guides investigation of etiology and possibly selection of optimal therapy, such as steroids in West syndrome. And it can inform prognosis,” Dr. Howell said at the congress sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy.

She and her coinvestigators analyzed the detailed records of all 114 infants with SEI born during the study period. The incidence was 1 in 2,000 live births.

“Among infants with epilepsy, this patient group with SEI is most critical to better understand. Effective treatment is often not available, the seizure and developmental outcomes are frequently devastating, and the health burden massive,” the neurologist observed.

The full spectrum of SEI

With the help of ictal EEGs, home seizure recordings, MRI scans, and genomic testing, the investigators were able to classify more than 85% of the infants. About 64% had a prototypic syndrome at onset, such as West syndrome, which accounted for 33% of all SEI, or Dravet syndrome, which was diagnosed in 3%.

The prevalence of the prototypic neonatal and early infantile epileptic syndromes was notably higher than previously reported by others: EIMFS accounted for 9% of total SEI, early infantile epileptic encephalopathy (EIEE) for 7%, and early myoclonic encephalopathy (EME) for 2%. This translated to an incidence of 1 in 28,000 live births for EIEE, 1 in 111,000 for EME, and 1 in 22,500 for EIMFS.


“While neither EIEE nor EIMFS are common, these incidences are actually not that much lower than the reported incidence of Dravet syndrome,” the neurologist pointed out.

About 36% of SEI didn’t fit into any of the prototypic syndromes. However, more than half of this subgroup, or 19% of total SEI, were prototypic syndrome like, a designation Dr. Howell and her coworkers used for cases that possessed most but not all of the well-recognized features of a particular prototypic syndrome; for example, West syndrome–like seizures but without hypsarrhythmia. Whether these prototypic syndrome-like SEI have etiologies and outcomes similar to or distinct from the prototypic syndromes remains a topic for further study.

SEI etiologies

A total of 14 patients had SEI because of an acquired syndrome attributed to brain injury, 31 were because of brain malformation, 21 involved single gene disorders, 9 were of chromosomal etiology, and 7 had a metabolic cause.

The key finding with regard to etiology was the glaring difference between children with West syndrome, its variants, or unifocal epilepsies as compared with the rest of the SEI patients. Those with West syndrome, a West syndrome–like designation, or unifocal epilepsies most commonly had a structural etiology for their SEI. Indeed, of the 52 children with West syndrome or a variant, 10 had an acquired brain injury as their etiology and 17 had a brain malformation. And of the 12 patients with unifocal SEI, 1 had a brain injury and 9 had brain malformations.

In contrast, children with neonatal or early infantile epileptic syndromes had predominantly genetic rather than structural etiologies. Of the 20 children with EIEE, EIMFS, or EME, none had brain injury as the etiology, only 1 had a brain malformation, but 9 had a single gene or chromosomal etiology.

Outcomes

“The outcome data highlight the extreme severity of SEI and the imperative for novel treatments: 16% mortality overall, so one in six was deceased by age 2 years. The infants who died after the neonatal period all had profound delays, and almost all had ongoing seizures until their death. Most survivors also had developmental delay, with severity ranging from mild to moderate in 49% to severe/profound in 41%. Just 10 of 114 children had normal development,” Dr. Howell reported.

However, there was a notable difference in outcomes between the various syndromes, and this information is highly relevant prognostically. Of the 20 children with neonatal and early infantile epileptic syndromes, 11 died and the other 9 had profound developmental delay. In contrast, the outlook was far better for children with West syndrome, West syndrome–like variants, or focal epilepsies: Among 64 affected patients, there were just 2 deaths, normal development in 9 patients, mild to moderate developmental delay in 34, and severe/profound delay in 19.

Dr. Howell reported having no financial conflicts regarding this study, which was supported by governmental research grants.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Howell KB et al. IEC 2019, Abstract P053.

PHILADELPHIA – An intravenous formulation of a calcitonin gene–related peptide inhibitor monoclonal antibody showed efficacy for preventing chronic migraine headaches for 3 months in a dose-ranging, phase 3 trial with 1,072 patients.

In a separate study with 669 patients, a single IV dose of the antibody, eptinezumab, also significantly reduced the incidence of episodic migraine headaches during 3 months of follow-up, compared with placebo. And in both the chronic and episodic migraine studies a similar 3-month effect resulted from a second IV dose of the humanized antibody that binds the calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP) ligand, thereby blocking the pathway, Laszlo L. Mechtler, MD, and his associates reported in a poster at the annual meeting of the American Headache Society.

Eptinezumab follows the therapeutic approach already used by three Food and Drug Administration–approved monoclonal antibody drugs that cut migraine headache recurrences by blocking the CGRP pathway by binding either the peptide ligand or its receptor: erenumab-aooe (Aimovig), fremanezumab-vfrm (Ajovy), and galcanezumab-gnlm (Emgality). Eptinezumab differs from the three approved CGRP antibodies by using an IV route of administration – the other three are delivered by subcutaneous injection – and by a 3-month dosing interval. Both erenumab-aooe and galcanezumab-gnlm are labeled for monthly administration only, while fremanezumab-vfrm is labeled for both monthly and once every 3 months dosing schedules.

The PROMISE-1 (A Multicenter Assessment of ALD403 in Frequent Episodic Migraine) trial randomized 669 patients with episodic migraine (defined as 4-14 headache days/month with at least 4 classifiable as migraine headache days) at 87 centers mostly in the United States and with some in Georgia. The PROMISE-2 (Evaluation of ALD403 (Eptinezumab) in the Prevention of Chronic Migraine) trial randomized 1,072 patients with chronic migraine (defined as a history of 15-26 headache days/month and with at least 8 of the days involving a migraine headache) at any of 145 study sites, many in the United States, in several countries.

In PROMISE-1, patients could receive as many as four serial infusions every 3 months, and up to two serial infusions in PROMISE-2, but the primary endpoint in both studies was the change in monthly migraine count from baseline during the 3 months following the first dosage.

Among patients with chronic migraine in PROMISE-2, the average monthly migraine number fell by 8.2 migraine days/month, compared with an average 5.6 monthly migraine days drop from baseline among placebo patients, which was a statistically significant difference for the higher dosage of eptinezumab tested, 300 mg. A 100-mg dose linked with an average 7.7 migraine days/month reduction, also a statistically significant difference from the placebo patients, reported Dr. Mechtler, professor of neurology at the State University of New York at Buffalo and medical director of the Dent Neurologic Institute in Buffalo, and his associates.

Among patients with episodic migraine in PROMISE-1, the 300-mg dosage cut monthly migraines by an average 4.3 migraine headache days/month, compared with 3.2 in the placebo group, a statistically significant difference. Among patients who received the 100-mg dosage, the average cut was 3.9 migraine headache days/month, also a statistically significant difference from the placebo controls.

The researchers included no safety findings in their report, but in an interview Dr. Mechtler said that eptinezumab showed an excellent safety profile that was consistent with what’s been previously reported for the approved agents from this class. He cited the safety of the drugs in the class as a major feature of their clinical utility.

PROMISE-1 and PROMISE-2 were sponsored by Alder BioPharmaceuticals, the company developing eptinezumab. Dr. Mechtler has been a speaker on behalf of Allergan, Amgen/Novartis, Boston Biomedical, Promius, Avanir, and Teva, and he has received research funding from Allergan, Autonomic Technologies, Boston Biomedical, and Teva.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Mechtler LL et al. Headache. 2019 June;59[S1]:34, Abstract P12

PHILADELPHIA – An intravenous formulation of a calcitonin gene–related peptide inhibitor monoclonal antibody showed efficacy for preventing chronic migraine headaches for 3 months in a dose-ranging, phase 3 trial with 1,072 patients.

In a separate study with 669 patients, a single IV dose of the antibody, eptinezumab, also significantly reduced the incidence of episodic migraine headaches during 3 months of follow-up, compared with placebo. And in both the chronic and episodic migraine studies a similar 3-month effect resulted from a second IV dose of the humanized antibody that binds the calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP) ligand, thereby blocking the pathway, Laszlo L. Mechtler, MD, and his associates reported in a poster at the annual meeting of the American Headache Society.

Eptinezumab follows the therapeutic approach already used by three Food and Drug Administration–approved monoclonal antibody drugs that cut migraine headache recurrences by blocking the CGRP pathway by binding either the peptide ligand or its receptor: erenumab-aooe (Aimovig), fremanezumab-vfrm (Ajovy), and galcanezumab-gnlm (Emgality). Eptinezumab differs from the three approved CGRP antibodies by using an IV route of administration – the other three are delivered by subcutaneous injection – and by a 3-month dosing interval. Both erenumab-aooe and galcanezumab-gnlm are labeled for monthly administration only, while fremanezumab-vfrm is labeled for both monthly and once every 3 months dosing schedules.

The PROMISE-1 (A Multicenter Assessment of ALD403 in Frequent Episodic Migraine) trial randomized 669 patients with episodic migraine (defined as 4-14 headache days/month with at least 4 classifiable as migraine headache days) at 87 centers mostly in the United States and with some in Georgia. The PROMISE-2 (Evaluation of ALD403 (Eptinezumab) in the Prevention of Chronic Migraine) trial randomized 1,072 patients with chronic migraine (defined as a history of 15-26 headache days/month and with at least 8 of the days involving a migraine headache) at any of 145 study sites, many in the United States, in several countries.

In PROMISE-1, patients could receive as many as four serial infusions every 3 months, and up to two serial infusions in PROMISE-2, but the primary endpoint in both studies was the change in monthly migraine count from baseline during the 3 months following the first dosage.

Among patients with chronic migraine in PROMISE-2, the average monthly migraine number fell by 8.2 migraine days/month, compared with an average 5.6 monthly migraine days drop from baseline among placebo patients, which was a statistically significant difference for the higher dosage of eptinezumab tested, 300 mg. A 100-mg dose linked with an average 7.7 migraine days/month reduction, also a statistically significant difference from the placebo patients, reported Dr. Mechtler, professor of neurology at the State University of New York at Buffalo and medical director of the Dent Neurologic Institute in Buffalo, and his associates.

Among patients with episodic migraine in PROMISE-1, the 300-mg dosage cut monthly migraines by an average 4.3 migraine headache days/month, compared with 3.2 in the placebo group, a statistically significant difference. Among patients who received the 100-mg dosage, the average cut was 3.9 migraine headache days/month, also a statistically significant difference from the placebo controls.

The researchers included no safety findings in their report, but in an interview Dr. Mechtler said that eptinezumab showed an excellent safety profile that was consistent with what’s been previously reported for the approved agents from this class. He cited the safety of the drugs in the class as a major feature of their clinical utility.

PROMISE-1 and PROMISE-2 were sponsored by Alder BioPharmaceuticals, the company developing eptinezumab. Dr. Mechtler has been a speaker on behalf of Allergan, Amgen/Novartis, Boston Biomedical, Promius, Avanir, and Teva, and he has received research funding from Allergan, Autonomic Technologies, Boston Biomedical, and Teva.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Mechtler LL et al. Headache. 2019 June;59[S1]:34, Abstract P12

PHILADELPHIA – An intravenous formulation of a calcitonin gene–related peptide inhibitor monoclonal antibody showed efficacy for preventing chronic migraine headaches for 3 months in a dose-ranging, phase 3 trial with 1,072 patients.

In a separate study with 669 patients, a single IV dose of the antibody, eptinezumab, also significantly reduced the incidence of episodic migraine headaches during 3 months of follow-up, compared with placebo. And in both the chronic and episodic migraine studies a similar 3-month effect resulted from a second IV dose of the humanized antibody that binds the calcitonin gene–related peptide (CGRP) ligand, thereby blocking the pathway, Laszlo L. Mechtler, MD, and his associates reported in a poster at the annual meeting of the American Headache Society.

Eptinezumab follows the therapeutic approach already used by three Food and Drug Administration–approved monoclonal antibody drugs that cut migraine headache recurrences by blocking the CGRP pathway by binding either the peptide ligand or its receptor: erenumab-aooe (Aimovig), fremanezumab-vfrm (Ajovy), and galcanezumab-gnlm (Emgality). Eptinezumab differs from the three approved CGRP antibodies by using an IV route of administration – the other three are delivered by subcutaneous injection – and by a 3-month dosing interval. Both erenumab-aooe and galcanezumab-gnlm are labeled for monthly administration only, while fremanezumab-vfrm is labeled for both monthly and once every 3 months dosing schedules.

The PROMISE-1 (A Multicenter Assessment of ALD403 in Frequent Episodic Migraine) trial randomized 669 patients with episodic migraine (defined as 4-14 headache days/month with at least 4 classifiable as migraine headache days) at 87 centers mostly in the United States and with some in Georgia. The PROMISE-2 (Evaluation of ALD403 (Eptinezumab) in the Prevention of Chronic Migraine) trial randomized 1,072 patients with chronic migraine (defined as a history of 15-26 headache days/month and with at least 8 of the days involving a migraine headache) at any of 145 study sites, many in the United States, in several countries.

In PROMISE-1, patients could receive as many as four serial infusions every 3 months, and up to two serial infusions in PROMISE-2, but the primary endpoint in both studies was the change in monthly migraine count from baseline during the 3 months following the first dosage.

Among patients with chronic migraine in PROMISE-2, the average monthly migraine number fell by 8.2 migraine days/month, compared with an average 5.6 monthly migraine days drop from baseline among placebo patients, which was a statistically significant difference for the higher dosage of eptinezumab tested, 300 mg. A 100-mg dose linked with an average 7.7 migraine days/month reduction, also a statistically significant difference from the placebo patients, reported Dr. Mechtler, professor of neurology at the State University of New York at Buffalo and medical director of the Dent Neurologic Institute in Buffalo, and his associates.

Among patients with episodic migraine in PROMISE-1, the 300-mg dosage cut monthly migraines by an average 4.3 migraine headache days/month, compared with 3.2 in the placebo group, a statistically significant difference. Among patients who received the 100-mg dosage, the average cut was 3.9 migraine headache days/month, also a statistically significant difference from the placebo controls.

The researchers included no safety findings in their report, but in an interview Dr. Mechtler said that eptinezumab showed an excellent safety profile that was consistent with what’s been previously reported for the approved agents from this class. He cited the safety of the drugs in the class as a major feature of their clinical utility.

PROMISE-1 and PROMISE-2 were sponsored by Alder BioPharmaceuticals, the company developing eptinezumab. Dr. Mechtler has been a speaker on behalf of Allergan, Amgen/Novartis, Boston Biomedical, Promius, Avanir, and Teva, and he has received research funding from Allergan, Autonomic Technologies, Boston Biomedical, and Teva.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Mechtler LL et al. Headache. 2019 June;59[S1]:34, Abstract P12

People with type 2 diabetes whose diet followed a “Mediterranean” pattern – high in vegetables, legumes, fish, and unsaturated fats – saw global cognitive improvements over a 2-year period, compared with individuals with different eating patterns, even if the latter incorporated healthy dietary features. In addition, effective glycemic control seemed to have a role in sustaining the benefits associated with the Mediterranean-type diet.

Adults without type 2 diabetes, meanwhile, did not see the cognitive improvements associated with a Mediterranean diet, suggesting that the pathways linking diet to cognition may be different for individuals with and without diabetes, according to Josiemer Mattei, PhD, of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston and colleagues.

The investigators used data from the Boston Puerto Rican Health Study, a longitudinal cohort of about 1,499 adults aged 45-75 years who lived in Boston and identified as Puerto Rican, for their research, which was published in Diabetes Care.

At baseline, participants were administered a questionnaire to capture their eating patterns. Four diet-quality scores – Mediterranean Diet Score, Healthy Eating Index, Alternate Healthy Eating Index, and DASH (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) were analyzed. The participants were also screened for diabetes, and nearly 40% of them were found to have type 2 diabetes at baseline (74% uncontrolled). They underwent a battery of cognitive tests, including the Mini-Mental State Exam and tests for verbal fluency, executive function, word recognition, and figure copying. The study endpoints included 2-year change in global cognitive function as well as executive and memory function. At 2 years, data was available for 913 participants.

Among participants with type 2 diabetes, greater adherence to a Mediterranean-style diet was significantly associated with a higher positive change at the 2-year follow-up in global cognitive function score (0.027 [SD, 0.011]; P = .016), the Mini-Mental State Exam, and other individual tests. The association was significant for those who were under glycemic control at baseline and who remained stable or improved over 2 years, but not for those with poor or worsening glycemic control.

“The Mediterranean diet explained as much or more of the variability in predicting changes in cognitive function in our study as did age, especially for participants with type 2 diabetes under glycemic control. ... This dietary pattern may provide more cognitive benefits [in this patient group] than other modifiable and nonmodifiable factors,” the authors wrote in their analysis. They stressed that a Mediterranean dietary pattern can be realized through foods and dishes that are already standard in many Puerto Rican households.

In participants who did not have diabetes, improvement in memory function measures was seen in association with a Mediterranean diet, but also with adherence to other eating patterns that are deemed healthy. That suggests that for this subgroup, any evidence-based healthy diet – not just the Mediterranean diet – may have some benefits for memory function.

“Dietary recommendations for cognitive health may need to be tailored for individuals with versus without type 2 diabetes,” the authors concluded.

Dr. Mattei and colleagues acknowledged as a limitation of their study its observational design.

The study received funding from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; the National Institute on Aging; and Harvard University. The authors reported no financial conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Mattei et al. Diabetes Care. 2019;42(8):1372-9.

People with type 2 diabetes whose diet followed a “Mediterranean” pattern – high in vegetables, legumes, fish, and unsaturated fats – saw global cognitive improvements over a 2-year period, compared with individuals with different eating patterns, even if the latter incorporated healthy dietary features. In addition, effective glycemic control seemed to have a role in sustaining the benefits associated with the Mediterranean-type diet.

Adults without type 2 diabetes, meanwhile, did not see the cognitive improvements associated with a Mediterranean diet, suggesting that the pathways linking diet to cognition may be different for individuals with and without diabetes, according to Josiemer Mattei, PhD, of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston and colleagues.

The investigators used data from the Boston Puerto Rican Health Study, a longitudinal cohort of about 1,499 adults aged 45-75 years who lived in Boston and identified as Puerto Rican, for their research, which was published in Diabetes Care.

At baseline, participants were administered a questionnaire to capture their eating patterns. Four diet-quality scores – Mediterranean Diet Score, Healthy Eating Index, Alternate Healthy Eating Index, and DASH (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) were analyzed. The participants were also screened for diabetes, and nearly 40% of them were found to have type 2 diabetes at baseline (74% uncontrolled). They underwent a battery of cognitive tests, including the Mini-Mental State Exam and tests for verbal fluency, executive function, word recognition, and figure copying. The study endpoints included 2-year change in global cognitive function as well as executive and memory function. At 2 years, data was available for 913 participants.

Among participants with type 2 diabetes, greater adherence to a Mediterranean-style diet was significantly associated with a higher positive change at the 2-year follow-up in global cognitive function score (0.027 [SD, 0.011]; P = .016), the Mini-Mental State Exam, and other individual tests. The association was significant for those who were under glycemic control at baseline and who remained stable or improved over 2 years, but not for those with poor or worsening glycemic control.

“The Mediterranean diet explained as much or more of the variability in predicting changes in cognitive function in our study as did age, especially for participants with type 2 diabetes under glycemic control. ... This dietary pattern may provide more cognitive benefits [in this patient group] than other modifiable and nonmodifiable factors,” the authors wrote in their analysis. They stressed that a Mediterranean dietary pattern can be realized through foods and dishes that are already standard in many Puerto Rican households.

In participants who did not have diabetes, improvement in memory function measures was seen in association with a Mediterranean diet, but also with adherence to other eating patterns that are deemed healthy. That suggests that for this subgroup, any evidence-based healthy diet – not just the Mediterranean diet – may have some benefits for memory function.

“Dietary recommendations for cognitive health may need to be tailored for individuals with versus without type 2 diabetes,” the authors concluded.

Dr. Mattei and colleagues acknowledged as a limitation of their study its observational design.

The study received funding from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; the National Institute on Aging; and Harvard University. The authors reported no financial conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Mattei et al. Diabetes Care. 2019;42(8):1372-9.

People with type 2 diabetes whose diet followed a “Mediterranean” pattern – high in vegetables, legumes, fish, and unsaturated fats – saw global cognitive improvements over a 2-year period, compared with individuals with different eating patterns, even if the latter incorporated healthy dietary features. In addition, effective glycemic control seemed to have a role in sustaining the benefits associated with the Mediterranean-type diet.

Adults without type 2 diabetes, meanwhile, did not see the cognitive improvements associated with a Mediterranean diet, suggesting that the pathways linking diet to cognition may be different for individuals with and without diabetes, according to Josiemer Mattei, PhD, of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston and colleagues.

The investigators used data from the Boston Puerto Rican Health Study, a longitudinal cohort of about 1,499 adults aged 45-75 years who lived in Boston and identified as Puerto Rican, for their research, which was published in Diabetes Care.

At baseline, participants were administered a questionnaire to capture their eating patterns. Four diet-quality scores – Mediterranean Diet Score, Healthy Eating Index, Alternate Healthy Eating Index, and DASH (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) were analyzed. The participants were also screened for diabetes, and nearly 40% of them were found to have type 2 diabetes at baseline (74% uncontrolled). They underwent a battery of cognitive tests, including the Mini-Mental State Exam and tests for verbal fluency, executive function, word recognition, and figure copying. The study endpoints included 2-year change in global cognitive function as well as executive and memory function. At 2 years, data was available for 913 participants.

Among participants with type 2 diabetes, greater adherence to a Mediterranean-style diet was significantly associated with a higher positive change at the 2-year follow-up in global cognitive function score (0.027 [SD, 0.011]; P = .016), the Mini-Mental State Exam, and other individual tests. The association was significant for those who were under glycemic control at baseline and who remained stable or improved over 2 years, but not for those with poor or worsening glycemic control.

“The Mediterranean diet explained as much or more of the variability in predicting changes in cognitive function in our study as did age, especially for participants with type 2 diabetes under glycemic control. ... This dietary pattern may provide more cognitive benefits [in this patient group] than other modifiable and nonmodifiable factors,” the authors wrote in their analysis. They stressed that a Mediterranean dietary pattern can be realized through foods and dishes that are already standard in many Puerto Rican households.

In participants who did not have diabetes, improvement in memory function measures was seen in association with a Mediterranean diet, but also with adherence to other eating patterns that are deemed healthy. That suggests that for this subgroup, any evidence-based healthy diet – not just the Mediterranean diet – may have some benefits for memory function.

“Dietary recommendations for cognitive health may need to be tailored for individuals with versus without type 2 diabetes,” the authors concluded.

Dr. Mattei and colleagues acknowledged as a limitation of their study its observational design.

The study received funding from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; the National Institute on Aging; and Harvard University. The authors reported no financial conflicts of interest.

SOURCE: Mattei et al. Diabetes Care. 2019;42(8):1372-9.

BANGKOK – It’s high time for the prediction of seizure outcomes after epilepsy surgery to step into the 21st century, Lara Jehi, MD, asserted at the International Epilepsy Congress.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

She and her colleagues have created and validated an online risk prediction tool that clinicians can use to predict a patient’s individualized likelihood of complete freedom from seizures 2 and 5 years after undergoing resective brain surgery for drug-resistant epilepsy. The risk predictor, known as the Epilepsy Surgery Nomogram, uses a handful of simple clinical characteristics – patient gender, pathologic cause of the seizures, the proposed type of epilepsy surgery, the presence or absence of generalized tonic-clonic seizures, epilepsy duration, and preoperative seizure frequency – and spits out the patient’s predicted seizure outcome, she explained at the congress, sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy.

“The point here is that every patient is an individual. And to give people predictions based on 500- or 600-patient Kaplan-Meier-derived curves that just provide the average outcome for the whole cohort isn’t really going to give them what they need as far as their individualized chance of becoming seizure free,” said Dr. Jehi, a neurologist at the Cleveland Clinic.

Similarly, reliance solely upon clinical judgment is a minefield. Multiple biases prevent physicians from making objective medical predictions, she continued.

“We think of the process of medical decision-making and outcome prediction as being a process that is logical and rational, where the accumulation of knowledge improves the decisions that we make, and where past experience improves judgment, and where collective decisions are more reliable. This is what intuitively we all think. That’s why we think we are invincible as physicians. And to that I say, really? There is a wealth of literature that actually disproves each one of these points,” Dr. Jehi declared.

Outcomes of brain surgery for drug-resistant epilepsy have remained static for more than half a century: Ten years after surgery, roughly half of treated patients remain completely seizure free. The inability of clinicians to use advanced statistics to inform potential surgical candidates about their individualized chance of becoming seizure free has probably contributed to underutilization of epilepsy surgery, she added.

The Epilepsy Surgery Nomogram was developed through detailed analysis of the records of 846 patients who underwent epilepsy surgery at the Cleveland Clinic. The resultant nomogram was then validated in a cohort of 604 patients who had resective surgery at the Mayo Clinic and epilepsy surgery centers in Brazil, Italy, and France. In the development cohort, the rate of complete freedom from seizures was 57% at 2 years and 40% at 5 years. In the validation study, the nomogram had a concordance statistic of 0.60 for complete freedom from seizures, which is considered better than chance, but well below the 0.80 threshold defined as strong concordance (Lancet Neurol. 2015 Mar;14[3]:283-90).

However, in an era when personalized medicine has become a catch phrase, the Epilepsy Surgery Nomogram has captured the attention of officials at the National Institutes of Health. Indeed, Dr. Jehi and her coworkers have received a $3.4 million, 5-year grant from the NIH to improve their risk prediction model by incorporating additional variables, including EEG data, MRI findings, family history, and genetic information. The enhanced risk calculator also will include a predictor of the likelihood that an individual will experience clinically meaningful improvement in quality of life in response to epilepsy surgery, since that’s an important outcome even in the absence of 100% freedom from seizures.

Recently, Dr. Jehi and coworkers have developed and then externally validated nomograms to predict the individualized risk of clinically relevant postoperative naming decline after temporal lobe epilepsy surgery in adults. A model based upon five variables – side of surgery, sex, education, age at epilepsy onset, and age at epilepsy surgery – performed very well, with a concordance statistic of 0.81. Moreover, a second nomogram predicting moderate to severe postoperative naming decline on the basis of just three variables – side of surgery, age at epilepsy onset, and preoperative score on the Boston Naming Test – had a concordance statistic of 0.84 (Neurology. 2018 Dec 4;91[23]:e2144-e2152. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000006629).

“Our future hopefully is one where there will always be room for gut feelings and intuition because we definitely need them. We want to honor them. But hopefully it is one where algorithms can help our guesses be more educated and where the science of algorithms and predictive modeling can help inform our outcome predictions and decision-making process,” she said.

The original Epilepsy Surgery Nomogram project was funded by the Cleveland Clinic Epilepsy Center. The postoperative naming decline nomograms project was funded by the NIH.

[email protected]

BANGKOK – It’s high time for the prediction of seizure outcomes after epilepsy surgery to step into the 21st century, Lara Jehi, MD, asserted at the International Epilepsy Congress.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

She and her colleagues have created and validated an online risk prediction tool that clinicians can use to predict a patient’s individualized likelihood of complete freedom from seizures 2 and 5 years after undergoing resective brain surgery for drug-resistant epilepsy. The risk predictor, known as the Epilepsy Surgery Nomogram, uses a handful of simple clinical characteristics – patient gender, pathologic cause of the seizures, the proposed type of epilepsy surgery, the presence or absence of generalized tonic-clonic seizures, epilepsy duration, and preoperative seizure frequency – and spits out the patient’s predicted seizure outcome, she explained at the congress, sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy.

“The point here is that every patient is an individual. And to give people predictions based on 500- or 600-patient Kaplan-Meier-derived curves that just provide the average outcome for the whole cohort isn’t really going to give them what they need as far as their individualized chance of becoming seizure free,” said Dr. Jehi, a neurologist at the Cleveland Clinic.

Similarly, reliance solely upon clinical judgment is a minefield. Multiple biases prevent physicians from making objective medical predictions, she continued.

“We think of the process of medical decision-making and outcome prediction as being a process that is logical and rational, where the accumulation of knowledge improves the decisions that we make, and where past experience improves judgment, and where collective decisions are more reliable. This is what intuitively we all think. That’s why we think we are invincible as physicians. And to that I say, really? There is a wealth of literature that actually disproves each one of these points,” Dr. Jehi declared.

Outcomes of brain surgery for drug-resistant epilepsy have remained static for more than half a century: Ten years after surgery, roughly half of treated patients remain completely seizure free. The inability of clinicians to use advanced statistics to inform potential surgical candidates about their individualized chance of becoming seizure free has probably contributed to underutilization of epilepsy surgery, she added.

The Epilepsy Surgery Nomogram was developed through detailed analysis of the records of 846 patients who underwent epilepsy surgery at the Cleveland Clinic. The resultant nomogram was then validated in a cohort of 604 patients who had resective surgery at the Mayo Clinic and epilepsy surgery centers in Brazil, Italy, and France. In the development cohort, the rate of complete freedom from seizures was 57% at 2 years and 40% at 5 years. In the validation study, the nomogram had a concordance statistic of 0.60 for complete freedom from seizures, which is considered better than chance, but well below the 0.80 threshold defined as strong concordance (Lancet Neurol. 2015 Mar;14[3]:283-90).

However, in an era when personalized medicine has become a catch phrase, the Epilepsy Surgery Nomogram has captured the attention of officials at the National Institutes of Health. Indeed, Dr. Jehi and her coworkers have received a $3.4 million, 5-year grant from the NIH to improve their risk prediction model by incorporating additional variables, including EEG data, MRI findings, family history, and genetic information. The enhanced risk calculator also will include a predictor of the likelihood that an individual will experience clinically meaningful improvement in quality of life in response to epilepsy surgery, since that’s an important outcome even in the absence of 100% freedom from seizures.

Recently, Dr. Jehi and coworkers have developed and then externally validated nomograms to predict the individualized risk of clinically relevant postoperative naming decline after temporal lobe epilepsy surgery in adults. A model based upon five variables – side of surgery, sex, education, age at epilepsy onset, and age at epilepsy surgery – performed very well, with a concordance statistic of 0.81. Moreover, a second nomogram predicting moderate to severe postoperative naming decline on the basis of just three variables – side of surgery, age at epilepsy onset, and preoperative score on the Boston Naming Test – had a concordance statistic of 0.84 (Neurology. 2018 Dec 4;91[23]:e2144-e2152. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000006629).

“Our future hopefully is one where there will always be room for gut feelings and intuition because we definitely need them. We want to honor them. But hopefully it is one where algorithms can help our guesses be more educated and where the science of algorithms and predictive modeling can help inform our outcome predictions and decision-making process,” she said.

The original Epilepsy Surgery Nomogram project was funded by the Cleveland Clinic Epilepsy Center. The postoperative naming decline nomograms project was funded by the NIH.

[email protected]

BANGKOK – It’s high time for the prediction of seizure outcomes after epilepsy surgery to step into the 21st century, Lara Jehi, MD, asserted at the International Epilepsy Congress.

Bruce Jancin/MDedge News

She and her colleagues have created and validated an online risk prediction tool that clinicians can use to predict a patient’s individualized likelihood of complete freedom from seizures 2 and 5 years after undergoing resective brain surgery for drug-resistant epilepsy. The risk predictor, known as the Epilepsy Surgery Nomogram, uses a handful of simple clinical characteristics – patient gender, pathologic cause of the seizures, the proposed type of epilepsy surgery, the presence or absence of generalized tonic-clonic seizures, epilepsy duration, and preoperative seizure frequency – and spits out the patient’s predicted seizure outcome, she explained at the congress, sponsored by the International League Against Epilepsy.

“The point here is that every patient is an individual. And to give people predictions based on 500- or 600-patient Kaplan-Meier-derived curves that just provide the average outcome for the whole cohort isn’t really going to give them what they need as far as their individualized chance of becoming seizure free,” said Dr. Jehi, a neurologist at the Cleveland Clinic.

Similarly, reliance solely upon clinical judgment is a minefield. Multiple biases prevent physicians from making objective medical predictions, she continued.

“We think of the process of medical decision-making and outcome prediction as being a process that is logical and rational, where the accumulation of knowledge improves the decisions that we make, and where past experience improves judgment, and where collective decisions are more reliable. This is what intuitively we all think. That’s why we think we are invincible as physicians. And to that I say, really? There is a wealth of literature that actually disproves each one of these points,” Dr. Jehi declared.

Outcomes of brain surgery for drug-resistant epilepsy have remained static for more than half a century: Ten years after surgery, roughly half of treated patients remain completely seizure free. The inability of clinicians to use advanced statistics to inform potential surgical candidates about their individualized chance of becoming seizure free has probably contributed to underutilization of epilepsy surgery, she added.

The Epilepsy Surgery Nomogram was developed through detailed analysis of the records of 846 patients who underwent epilepsy surgery at the Cleveland Clinic. The resultant nomogram was then validated in a cohort of 604 patients who had resective surgery at the Mayo Clinic and epilepsy surgery centers in Brazil, Italy, and France. In the development cohort, the rate of complete freedom from seizures was 57% at 2 years and 40% at 5 years. In the validation study, the nomogram had a concordance statistic of 0.60 for complete freedom from seizures, which is considered better than chance, but well below the 0.80 threshold defined as strong concordance (Lancet Neurol. 2015 Mar;14[3]:283-90).

However, in an era when personalized medicine has become a catch phrase, the Epilepsy Surgery Nomogram has captured the attention of officials at the National Institutes of Health. Indeed, Dr. Jehi and her coworkers have received a $3.4 million, 5-year grant from the NIH to improve their risk prediction model by incorporating additional variables, including EEG data, MRI findings, family history, and genetic information. The enhanced risk calculator also will include a predictor of the likelihood that an individual will experience clinically meaningful improvement in quality of life in response to epilepsy surgery, since that’s an important outcome even in the absence of 100% freedom from seizures.

Recently, Dr. Jehi and coworkers have developed and then externally validated nomograms to predict the individualized risk of clinically relevant postoperative naming decline after temporal lobe epilepsy surgery in adults. A model based upon five variables – side of surgery, sex, education, age at epilepsy onset, and age at epilepsy surgery – performed very well, with a concordance statistic of 0.81. Moreover, a second nomogram predicting moderate to severe postoperative naming decline on the basis of just three variables – side of surgery, age at epilepsy onset, and preoperative score on the Boston Naming Test – had a concordance statistic of 0.84 (Neurology. 2018 Dec 4;91[23]:e2144-e2152. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000006629).

“Our future hopefully is one where there will always be room for gut feelings and intuition because we definitely need them. We want to honor them. But hopefully it is one where algorithms can help our guesses be more educated and where the science of algorithms and predictive modeling can help inform our outcome predictions and decision-making process,” she said.

The original Epilepsy Surgery Nomogram project was funded by the Cleveland Clinic Epilepsy Center. The postoperative naming decline nomograms project was funded by the NIH.

[email protected]