Suppr超能文献

抗癫痫药物对主观和客观认知的影响。

Antiepileptic drug effects on subjective and objective cognition.

机构信息

Department of Neurology, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH, USA.

Department of Neurology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH, USA.

出版信息

Epilepsy Behav. 2020 Mar;104(Pt A):106906. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2020.106906. Epub 2020 Jan 29.

Abstract

RATIONALE

Cognitive impairment is one of the most common complaints for persons with epilepsy (PWE). These impairments are not only associated with seizures, but are also regularly reported as adverse effects of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Previous studies have examined cognitive effects of both AED monotherapy and polytherapy, yet there is limited research on these differences with respect to both subjective and objective cognition. The current study uses data from previous research conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)-sponsored Managing Epilepsy Well (MEW) Network collaborative. We used three distinct archival datasets from the following: (1) the HOBSCOTCH efficacy trial at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center (HOB-1), (2) the multisite replication trial (HOB-2), and (3) epilepsy self-management research conducted at the NYU School of Medicine.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis combined baseline data from three datasets to determine how the number of AEDs and the type of AEDs were associated with subjective (patient-reported) and objective (examiner-assessed) cognition. Subjective cognition was captured using the cognitive subscale of the Quality of Life in Epilepsy Inventory (QOLIE-31) in all three datasets (n = 224), while objective cognition was measured using the Repeated Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) in the HOB-1 dataset (n = 65) and the Brief Test of Adult Cognition by Telephone (BTACT) in the HOB-2 dataset (n = 91). Multivariable linear regression was utilized for our initial assessments, followed by propensity score matching to provide stronger control of covariates. Matching was based on significantly different covariates, such as education, depression, and history of prior epilepsy surgery. Nonparametric statistical tests were utilized to compare these matched subjects.

RESULTS

Subjective cognitive impairment was significantly worse among individuals on polytherapy (2 + AEDs) compared with those on monotherapy (1 AED) (adjusted p  =  0.041). These findings were consistent with our propensity score matched comparison of monotherapy and polytherapy, which indicated that polytherapy was associated with worse overall subjective cognition (adjusted p = 0.01), in addition to impairments on the RBANS (Total score p = 0.05) and specific subdomains of the BTACT (Episodic Verbal Memory p < 0.01, Working Memory p < 0.01, Processing Speed p < 0.01). Interestingly, older generation AEDs were associated with better language performance than newer generation and combined generation AED therapy (RBANS Language p = 0.03). These language-specific findings remained significant after controlling for the effects of topiramate and zonisamide (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

A greater number of AEDs is significantly and negatively associated with subjective and objective cognition in PWE, and is in line with previous research. Antiepileptic drug type did not, in itself, appear to be associated with subjective cognition. Our findings suggest that ineffective AEDs should be replaced, rather than introducing additional AEDs to a treatment regimen. Further, while subjective and objective cognition assessments were both sensitive at detecting differences based on AED status, the neuropsychological objective subdomains offer additional and specific insights into how cognition is impaired with AEDs.

摘要

背景

认知障碍是癫痫患者(PWE)最常见的抱怨之一。这些损伤不仅与癫痫发作有关,而且经常被报告为抗癫痫药物(AED)的不良反应。先前的研究已经检查了 AED 单药治疗和联合治疗的认知影响,但关于这两种治疗方法在主观和客观认知方面的差异,研究还很有限。目前的研究使用了疾病控制和预防中心(CDC)赞助的管理癫痫良好(MEW)网络合作的先前研究的数据。我们使用了以下三个不同的档案数据集:(1)达特茅斯-希契科克医疗中心(HOB-1)的 HOBSCOTCH 疗效试验,(2)多地点复制试验(HOB-2),以及(3)在纽约大学医学院进行的癫痫自我管理研究。

方法

这项回顾性分析结合了三个数据集的基线数据,以确定 AED 的数量和类型如何与主观(患者报告)和客观(检查者评估)认知相关。主观认知使用三个数据集(n=224)中的癫痫生活质量量表(QOLIE-31)认知子量表进行评估,而客观认知使用在 HOB-1 数据集(n=65)中使用的重复神经心理状态评估电池(RBANS)和在 HOB-2 数据集(n=91)中使用的成人认知电话测试(BTACT)进行评估。我们最初使用多变量线性回归进行评估,然后使用倾向评分匹配提供更强的协变量控制。匹配基于显著不同的协变量,如教育、抑郁和先前癫痫手术史。非参数统计检验用于比较这些匹配的受试者。

结果

与单药治疗(1 种 AED)相比,多药治疗(2+AED)者的主观认知障碍明显更严重(调整后 p=0.041)。这些发现与我们对单药治疗和多药治疗的倾向评分匹配比较一致,表明多药治疗与总体主观认知较差有关(调整后 p=0.01),此外,还与 RBANS(总分 p=0.05)和 BTACT 的特定子域(情景记忆 p<0.01,工作记忆 p<0.01,处理速度 p<0.01)受损有关。有趣的是,与较新的和联合生成的 AED 治疗相比,老一代 AED 与更好的语言表现相关(RBANS 语言 p=0.03)。在控制了托吡酯和唑尼沙胺的影响后(p=0.04),这些语言特异性发现仍然具有统计学意义。

结论

AED 的数量与 PWE 的主观和客观认知呈显著负相关,与先前的研究一致。抗癫痫药物的类型本身似乎与主观认知无关。我们的研究结果表明,应该更换无效的 AED,而不是在治疗方案中添加额外的 AED。此外,虽然主观和客观认知评估都能敏感地检测到基于 AED 状态的差异,但神经心理学的客观子域提供了关于 AED 如何损害认知的额外和具体见解。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f1b2/7064420/2921ed5a364d/nihms-1562233-f0001.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