Yi Zhan-Miao, Wen Cheng, Cai Ting, Xu Lu, Zhong Xu-Li, Zhan Si-Yan, Zhai Suo-Di
Department of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China,
Department of Pharmacy Administration and Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Science, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China.
Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2018 Dec 17;15:1-19. doi: 10.2147/NDT.S181886. eCollection 2019.
To evaluate the efficacy, safety and economics of levetiracetam (LEV) for epilepsy.
PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, OpenGrey.eu and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for systematic reviews (SRs), meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), observational studies, case reports and economic studies published from January 2007 to April 2018. We used a bubble plot to graphically display information of included studies and conducted meta-analyses to quantitatively synthesize the evidence.
A total of 14,803 records were obtained. We included 30 SRs/meta-analyses, 34 RCTs, 18 observational studies, 58 case reports and 2 economic studies after the screening process. The included SRs enrolled patients with pediatric epilepsy, epilepsy in pregnancy, focal epilepsy, generalized epilepsy and refractory focal epilepsy. Meta-analysis of the included RCTs indicated that LEV was as effective as carbamazepine (CBZ; treatment for 6 months: 58.9% vs 64.8%, OR=0.76, 95% CI: 0.50-1.16; 12 months: 54.9% vs 55.5%, OR=1.24, 95% CI: 0.79-1.93), oxcarbazepine (57.7% vs 59.8%, OR=1.34, 95% CI: 0.34-5.23), phenobarbital (50.0% vs 50.9%, OR=1.20, 95% CI: 0.51-2.82) and lamotrigine (LTG; 61.5% vs 57.7%, OR=1.22, 95% CI: 0.90-1.66). SRs and observational studies indicated a low malformation rate and intrauterine death rate for pregnant women, as well as low risk of cognitive side effects. But psychiatric and behavioral side effects could not be ruled out. LEV decreased discontinuation due to adverse events compared with CBZ (OR=0.52, 95% CI: 0.41-0.65), while no difference was found when LEV was compared with placebo and LTG. Two cost-effectiveness evaluations for refractory epilepsy with decision-tree model showed US$ 76.18 per seizure-free day gained in Canada and US$ 44 per seizure-free day gained in Korea.
LEV is as effective as CBZ, oxcarbazepine, phenobarbital and LTG and has an advantage for pregnant women and in cognitive functions. Limited evidence supports its cost-effectiveness.
PROSPERO (No CRD 42017069367).
评估左乙拉西坦(LEV)治疗癫痫的疗效、安全性和经济性。
检索PubMed、Scopus、Cochrane图书馆、OpenGrey.eu和ClinicalTrials.gov,查找2007年1月至2018年4月发表的系统评价(SRs)、荟萃分析、随机对照试验(RCTs)、观察性研究、病例报告和经济学研究。我们使用气泡图以图形方式展示纳入研究的信息,并进行荟萃分析以定量综合证据。
共获得14,803条记录。经过筛选过程,我们纳入了30项SRs/荟萃分析、34项RCTs、18项观察性研究、58项病例报告和2项经济学研究。纳入的SRs纳入了小儿癫痫、妊娠癫痫、局灶性癫痫、全身性癫痫和难治性局灶性癫痫患者。对纳入的RCTs进行的荟萃分析表明,LEV与卡马西平(CBZ;治疗6个月:58.9%对64.8%,OR = 0.76,95%CI:0.50 - 1.16;12个月:54.9%对55.5%,OR = 1.24,95%CI:0.79 - 1.93)、奥卡西平(57.7%对59.8%,OR = 1.34,95%CI:0.34 - 5.23)、苯巴比妥(50.0%对50.9%,OR = 1.20,95%CI:0.51 - 2.82)和拉莫三嗪(LTG;61.5%对57.7%,OR = 1.22,95%CI:0.90 - 1.66)疗效相当。SRs和观察性研究表明,孕妇的畸形率和宫内死亡率较低,认知副作用风险也较低。但不能排除精神和行为副作用。与CBZ相比,LEV因不良事件导致的停药率降低(OR = 0.52,95%CI:0.41 - 0.65),而与安慰剂和LTG相比未发现差异。两项采用决策树模型对难治性癫痫的成本效益评估显示,加拿大每获得一个无癫痫发作日的成本为76.18美元,韩国为44美元。
LEV与CBZ、奥卡西平、苯巴比妥和LTG疗效相当,对孕妇和认知功能具有优势。有限的证据支持其成本效益。
PROSPERO(编号CRD 42017069367)