Suppr超能文献

新诊断癫痫患者左乙拉西坦和卡马西平控释片单药治疗的长期安全性和疗效。

Long-term safety and efficacy of lacosamide and controlled-release carbamazepine monotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy.

机构信息

Institute for Clinical Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Department of Neurology, Hospital São Sebastião, Centro Hospitalar de Entre o Douro e Vouga, Santa Maria da Feira, Portugal.

出版信息

Epilepsia. 2019 Dec;60(12):2437-2447. doi: 10.1111/epi.16381. Epub 2019 Nov 21.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

A large-scale, double-blind trial (SP0993; NCT01243177) demonstrated that lacosamide was noninferior to controlled-release carbamazepine (carbamazepine-CR) in terms of efficacy, and well tolerated as first-line monotherapy in patients (≥16 years of age) with newly diagnosed epilepsy. We report primary safety outcomes from the double-blind extension of the noninferiority trial (SP0994; NCT01465997) and post hoc analyses of pooled long-term safety and efficacy data from both trials.

METHODS

Patients were randomized 1:1 to lacosamide or carbamazepine-CR. Doses were escalated (lacosamide: 200/400/600 mg/d; carbamazepine-CR: 400/800/1200 mg/d) based on seizure control. Eligible patients continued randomized treatment in the extension. Primary outcomes of the extension were treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious TEAEs, and discontinuations due to TEAEs. Post hoc analyses of data from combined trials included 12- and 24-month seizure freedom and TEAEs by number of comorbid conditions.

RESULTS

A total of 886 patients were treated in the initial trial and 548 in the extension; 211 of 279 patients (75.6%) on lacosamide and 180/269 (66.9%) on carbamazepine-CR completed the extension. In the extension, 181 patients (64.9%) on lacosamide and 182 (67.7%) on carbamazepine-CR reported TEAEs; in both groups, nasopharyngitis, headache, and dizziness were most common. Serious TEAEs were reported by 32 patients (11.5%) on lacosamide and 22 (8.2%) on carbamazepine-CR; 12 (4.3%) and 21 (7.8%) discontinued due to TEAEs. In the combined trials (median exposure: lacosamide 630 days; carbamazepine-CR 589 days), Kaplan-Meier estimated proportions of patients with 12- and 24-month seizure freedom from first dose were 50.8% (95% confidence interval 46.2%-55.4%) and 47.0% (42.2%-51.7%) on lacosamide, and 54.9% (50.3%-59.6%) and 50.9% (46.0%-55.7%) on carbamazepine-CR. Incidences of drug-related TEAEs and discontinuations due to TEAEs increased by number of comorbid conditions and were lower in patients on lacosamide.

SIGNIFICANCE

Long-term (median ~2 years) lacosamide monotherapy was efficacious and generally well tolerated in adults with newly diagnosed epilepsy. Seizure freedom rates were similar with lacosamide and carbamazepine-CR.

摘要

目的

一项大规模、双盲试验(SP0993;NCT01243177)表明,在疗效方面,拉科酰胺不亚于卡马西平控释剂(卡马西平-CR),并且作为新诊断为癫痫的患者的一线单药治疗,具有良好的耐受性。我们报告了非劣效性试验(SP0994;NCT01465997)的双盲扩展的主要安全性结果,以及来自两项试验的长期安全性和疗效数据的事后分析。

方法

患者按 1:1 随机分为拉科酰胺或卡马西平-CR。根据控制癫痫发作的情况,逐渐增加剂量(拉科酰胺:200/400/600mg/d;卡马西平-CR:400/800/1200mg/d)。符合条件的患者在扩展期继续接受随机治疗。扩展期的主要结局是治疗期间出现的不良事件(TEAEs)、严重的 TEAEs 和因 TEAEs 而停药。对来自联合试验的数据的事后分析包括 12 个月和 24 个月的无癫痫发作率和根据合并症数量的 TEAEs。

结果

共有 886 名患者在初始试验中接受治疗,548 名患者在扩展期接受治疗;拉科酰胺组有 279 名患者中的 211 名(75.6%)和卡马西平-CR 组的 269 名患者中的 180 名(66.9%)完成了扩展期。在扩展期,拉科酰胺组有 181 名患者(64.9%)和卡马西平-CR 组有 182 名患者(67.7%)报告 TEAEs;两组中最常见的 TEAEs 是鼻咽炎、头痛和头晕。拉科酰胺组有 32 名患者(11.5%)和卡马西平-CR 组有 22 名患者(8.2%)报告严重的 TEAEs;有 12 名(4.3%)和 21 名(7.8%)因 TEAEs 而停药。在联合试验中(中位暴露:拉科酰胺 630 天;卡马西平-CR 589 天),首次剂量后 12 个月和 24 个月无癫痫发作的 Kaplan-Meier 估计比例分别为拉科酰胺组 50.8%(95%置信区间 46.2%-55.4%)和 47.0%(42.2%-51.7%),卡马西平-CR 组为 54.9%(50.3%-59.6%)和 50.9%(46.0%-55.7%)。药物相关 TEAEs 的发生率和因 TEAEs 而停药的比例随着合并症数量的增加而增加,拉科酰胺组的发生率和比例较低。

意义

在新诊断为癫痫的成人中,长期(中位~2 年)拉科酰胺单药治疗是有效且通常耐受良好的。拉科酰胺和卡马西平-CR 的无癫痫发作率相似。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/7ff9/6988520/38f3e6cf2007/EPI-60-2437-g001.jpg

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