Suppr超能文献

基于作用机制的部分发作性癫痫药物联合治疗的疗效。

Effectiveness of antiepileptic drug combination therapy for partial-onset seizures based on mechanisms of action.

机构信息

Truven Health Analytics, Bethesda, Maryland.

Truven Health Analytics, Santa Barbara, California.

出版信息

JAMA Neurol. 2014 Aug;71(8):985-93. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2014.808.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

To our knowledge, the current study is the first to describe antiepileptic drug (AED) combination therapy patterns according to their mechanism of action (MOA) in a real-world setting and to evaluate the differences in outcomes comparing different-MOA combination therapy with same-MOA combination therapy for patients with partial-onset seizure.

OBJECTIVE

To compare treatment persistence and health care use with AED combinations categorized by MOA in patients with partial-onset seizures.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Using the Truven Health MarketScan Commercial Claims Database containing 96 million covered lives from July 1, 2004, through March 31, 2011, adults with concomitant use of 2 different AEDs and a recent partial-onset seizure diagnosis were selected. Antiepileptic drugs were categorized by MOA: sodium channel blockers (SC), gamma-aminobutyric acid analogs (G), synaptic vesicle protein 2A binding (SV2), and multiple mechanisms (M). Patients were assigned a combination category based on their concomitant AED use.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Treatment persistence was measured from the start of AED combination therapy until the end of the combination. Health care resource use was measured during the combination treatment duration. Multivariate analyses evaluated AED discontinuation risk and health care use according to MOA combinations.

RESULTS

Distribution of 8615 selected patients by combination was 3.3% for G+G, 7.5% for G+SV2, 8.6% for G+M, 13.9% for SC+SC, 19.0% for G+SC, 21.5% for SC+M, and 26.3% for SC+SV2. The same-MOA (G+G and SC+SC) combinations had the shortest persistence (mean [SD], 344 [345] days and 513 [530] days, respectively) and greater hazard of discontinuation compared with different-MOA combinations. Patients with different-MOA G combinations had a significantly lower risk for inpatient admission (odds ratio, 0.716; 95% CI, 0.539-0.952; P = .02) compared with G+G combinations. Patients with different-MOA SC combinations had significantly lower risks for emergency department visits (odds ratio, 0.853; 95% CI, 0.742-0.980; P = .03) compared with SC+SC combinations.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings suggest that AED combinations with different MOAs have greater effectiveness as measured by treatment persistence and lower risks for hospitalization and emergency department visits. Further research is needed to more fully understand the role of the MOA in achieving optimal outcomes.

摘要

重要性

据我们所知,本研究首次根据作用机制 (MOA) 在真实环境中描述抗癫痫药物 (AED) 联合治疗模式,并评估比较不同 MOA 联合治疗与相同 MOA 联合治疗在局灶性发作患者中的差异。

目的

比较局灶性发作患者根据 MOA 分类的 AED 联合治疗的治疗持久性和医疗保健使用情况。

设计、设置和参与者:使用 Truven Health MarketScan 商业索赔数据库,该数据库包含 2004 年 7 月 1 日至 2011 年 3 月 31 日期间 9600 万份覆盖生命的数据,选择同时使用 2 种不同 AED 且近期有局灶性发作诊断的成年人。根据 MOA 将抗癫痫药物分类:钠离子通道阻滞剂 (SC)、γ-氨基丁酸类似物 (G)、突触小泡蛋白 2A 结合物 (SV2) 和多种机制 (M)。根据同时使用的 AED 将患者分配到联合类别中。

主要结果和测量

从 AED 联合治疗开始到联合结束测量治疗持久性。在联合治疗期间测量医疗保健资源的使用情况。多变量分析根据 MOA 组合评估 AED 停药风险和医疗保健使用情况。

结果

根据联合情况,8615 名选定患者的分布为 G+G 为 3.3%,G+SV2 为 7.5%,G+M 为 8.6%,SC+SC 为 13.9%,G+SC 为 19.0%,SC+M 为 21.5%,SC+SV2 为 26.3%。相同 MOA(G+G 和 SC+SC)组合的持续时间最短(平均 [SD],分别为 344 [345] 天和 513 [530] 天),与不同 MOA 组合相比,停药的风险更高。与 G+G 组合相比,不同 MOA 的 G 组合的患者住院风险显著降低(比值比,0.716;95%CI,0.539-0.952;P=0.02)。与 SC+SC 组合相比,不同 MOA 的 SC 组合的患者急诊就诊风险显著降低(比值比,0.853;95%CI,0.742-0.980;P=0.03)。

结论和相关性

研究结果表明,不同 MOA 的 AED 联合治疗在治疗持久性方面具有更高的疗效,住院和急诊就诊的风险更低。需要进一步研究以更全面地了解 MOA 在实现最佳结果中的作用。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验