Suppr超能文献

拉考沙胺治疗脑血管病相关性癫痫患者的效果。

Lacosamide in patients with epilepsy of cerebrovascular etiology.

机构信息

Epilepsy Center Frankfurt Rhine-Main, Neurocenter, University Hospital Frankfurt and Center for Personalized Translational Epilepsy Research (CePTER), Goethe-University, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.

Bethel Epilepsy Centre, Mara Hospital, Bielefeld, Germany.

出版信息

Acta Neurol Scand. 2020 Jun;141(6):473-482. doi: 10.1111/ane.13230. Epub 2020 Mar 13.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To assess tolerability and efficacy of lacosamide in adults with cerebrovascular epilepsy etiology (CVEE).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Exploratory post hoc analyses of a double-blind, initial monotherapy trial of lacosamide vs carbamazepine-controlled release (carbamazepine-CR) (SP0993; NCT01243177); a double-blind conversion to lacosamide monotherapy trial (SP0902; NCT00520741); and an observational study of adjunctive lacosamide added to one antiepileptic drug (SP0973 VITOBA; NCT01098162). Patients with CVEE were identified based on epilepsy etiology recorded at baseline.

RESULTS

In the initial monotherapy trial, 61 patients had CVEE (lacosamide: 27; carbamazepine-CR: 34). 20 (74.1%) patients on lacosamide (27 [79.4%] on carbamazepine-CR) reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), most commonly (≥10%) headache, dizziness, and fatigue (carbamazepine-CR: headache, dizziness). A numerically higher proportion of patients on lacosamide than carbamazepine-CR completed 6 months (22 [81.5%]; 20 [58.8%]) and 12 months (18 [66.7%]; 17 [50.0%]) treatment without seizure at last evaluated dose. In the conversion to monotherapy trial, 26/30 (86.7%) patients with CVEE reported TEAEs, most commonly (≥4 patients) dizziness, convulsion, fatigue, headache, somnolence, and cognitive disorder. During lacosamide monotherapy, 17 (56.7%) patients were 50% responders and six (20.0%) were seizure-free. In the observational study, 36/83 (43.4%) patients with CVEE reported TEAEs, most commonly (≥5%) fatigue and dizziness. Effectiveness was assessed for 75 patients. During the last 3 months, 60 (80%) were 50% responders and 42 (56.0%) were seizure-free.

CONCLUSIONS

These exploratory post hoc analyses suggested lacosamide was generally well tolerated and effective in patients with CVEE, with data from the initial monotherapy trial suggesting numerically better efficacy than carbamazepine-CR.

摘要

目的

评估拉科酰胺在脑血管病癫痫病因(CVEE)成人患者中的耐受性和疗效。

材料和方法

对拉科酰胺与卡马西平控释剂(carbamazepine-CR)(SP0993;NCT01243177)初始单药试验、拉科酰胺单药转换双盲试验(SP0902;NCT00520741)和添加一种抗癫痫药物的辅助性拉科酰胺观察性研究(SP0973 VITOBA;NCT01098162)的探索性事后分析;患者根据基线时记录的癫痫病因确定为 CVEE。

结果

在初始单药试验中,61 例患者患有 CVEE(拉科酰胺:27;carbamazepine-CR:34)。20 例(74.1%)拉科酰胺患者(27 例[79.4%]carbamazepine-CR)报告治疗中出现的不良事件(TEAEs),最常见的是(≥10%)头痛、头晕和疲劳(carbamazepine-CR:头痛、头晕)。与 carbamazepine-CR 相比,接受拉科酰胺治疗的患者在最后一次评估剂量时完成 6 个月(22 [81.5%];20 [58.8%])和 12 个月(18 [66.7%];17 [50.0%])治疗而无癫痫发作的比例更高。在转换为单药治疗试验中,26/30(86.7%)CVEE 患者报告了 TEAEs,最常见的是(≥4 例)头晕、抽搐、疲劳、头痛、嗜睡和认知障碍。在拉科酰胺单药治疗期间,17 例(56.7%)患者为 50%应答者,6 例(20.0%)患者无癫痫发作。在观察性研究中,36/83(43.4%)CVEE 患者报告了 TEAEs,最常见的是(≥5%)疲劳和头晕。对 75 例患者进行了有效性评估。在最后 3 个月期间,60 例(80%)为 50%应答者,42 例(56.0%)无癫痫发作。

结论

这些探索性事后分析表明,拉科酰胺通常耐受性良好,对 CVEE 患者有效,初始单药试验数据表明疗效优于 carbamazepine-CR。

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