scholarly journals P.005 Long-term retention on adjunctive brivaracetam in adults with focal seizures and previous carbamazepine, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, or topiramate use: Post-hoc analysis

Author(s):  
K Foris ◽  
M Martin ◽  
S Dimova ◽  
S Elmoufti ◽  
C Laloyaux ◽  
...  

Background: Previous post-hoc analysis of three 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of adjunctive brivaracetam (BRV) in patients with focal seizures demonstrated similar efficacy over placebo regardless of previous carbamazepine (CBZ), lamotrigine (LTG), levetiracetam (LEV), or topiramate (TPM) failure. This analysis explored long-term retention of adjunctive BRV in patients with previous CBZ/LTG/LEV/TPM. Methods: Post-hoc analysis of double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (N01358 [NCT01261325]) and open-label extension (N01379 [NCT01339559]; cut-off 15-March-2017) of adjunctive BRV in patients (≥16 years) with focal seizures. Outcomes were assessed in patients randomized to BRV (100 or 200 mg/day) who had previous CBZ/LTG/LEV/TPM (stopped ≥90 days before BRV initiation). Results: 503 patients were analyzed. Baseline characteristics were generally similar in subgroups with previous CBZ/LTG/LEV/TPM (n=209/162/256/182). Overall, Kaplan-Meier-estimated BRV retention at 1-, 3-, and 5-years was 71.0%, 50.9%, and 32.4%. Across previous antiepileptic drug (AED) subgroups, Kaplan-Meier-estimated BRV retention (1-year: 64.8%–73.2%; 3-year: 41.9%–49.9%; 5-year: 31.5%–35.7%), BRV discontinuations (58.4%–63.0%), and most common reasons for discontinuation (lack of efficacy: 23.0%–25.3%; adverse event: 16.7%–22.2%) were generally similar. Conclusions: Post-hoc analysis demonstrated similar long-term retention rates and discontinuation reasons with adjunctive BRV in adults previously treated with CBZ/LTG/LEV/TPM. Adjunctive BRV provides long-term effectiveness in patients who failed common AED treatments, including LEV.UCB Pharma-sponsored

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (suppl_1) ◽  
pp. S118-S118
Author(s):  
Steven Potkin ◽  
Christoph Correll ◽  
Cheng-Tao Chang ◽  
Balázs Szatmári ◽  
István Laszlovszky ◽  
...  

Seizure ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 61 ◽  
pp. 78-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuel Toledo ◽  
Elena Fonseca ◽  
Marta Olivé ◽  
Manuel Requena ◽  
Manuel Quintana ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 54 (3) ◽  
pp. 298-307
Author(s):  
Mehar G Kang ◽  
Hong Qian ◽  
Kamyar Keramatian ◽  
Trisha Chakrabarty ◽  
Gayatri Saraf ◽  
...  

Objective: Lithium and valproate are commonly used either in monotherapy or in combination with atypical antipsychotics in maintenance treatment of bipolar I disorder; however, their comparative efficacy is not well understood. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of valproate and lithium on mood stability either in monotherapy or in combination with atypical antipsychotics. Methods: We performed a post hoc analysis using data from a 52-week randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, that recruited 159 patients with recently remitted mania during treatment with lithium or valproate and adjunctive atypical antipsychotic therapy. Patients were randomized to discontinue adjunctive atypical antipsychotic at 0, 24 or 52 weeks. Results: No significant differences in efficacy were observed between valproate and lithium (hazard ratio: 0.99; 95% confidence interval: [0.66, 1.48]) in time to any mood event. Valproate with 24 weeks of atypical antipsychotic was significantly superior to valproate monotherapy in preventing any mood relapse (hazard ratio: 0.46; 95% confidence interval: [0.22, 0.97]) while lithium with 24 weeks of atypical antipsychotic was superior to lithium monotherapy in preventing mania (hazard ratio: 0.27; 95% confidence interval: [0.09, 0.85]) but not depression. Conclusion: Overall, this study did not find significant differences in efficacy between the two mood-stabilizing agents when used as monotherapy or in combination with atypical antipsychotics. However, study design and small sample size might have precluded from detecting an effect if true difference in efficacy existed. Further head-to-head investigations with stratified designs are needed to evaluate maintenance therapies.


Drug Safety ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (9) ◽  
pp. 1091-1102
Author(s):  
Mengqin Ge ◽  
Kenneth K. Man ◽  
Celine S. Chui ◽  
Esther W. Chan ◽  
Ian C. Wong ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document