Rapid switching from levetiracetam to brivaracetam in pharmaco-resistant epilepsy in people with and without intellectual disabilities: a naturalistic case control study.

BACKGROUND: Approximately one quarter of people with an intellectual disability (PwID) have epilepsy of whom nearly three-quarters are pharmaco-resistant. There are higher reported neuropsychiatric side-effects to anti-seizure medication (ASM) in this group. Levetiracetam (LEV) is a first-line ASM with a stronger association with neuropsychiatric symptoms for PwID than other ASMs. Brivaracetam (BRV) is a newer ASM. Recent studies suggest a beneficial effect of swapping people who experience neuropsychiatric events with LEV to BRV. However, there is limited evidence of this for PwID. This evaluation analyses real world outcomes of LEV to BRV swap for PwID compared to those without ID. METHODS: We performed a multicentre, retrospective review of clinical records. Demographic, clinical characteristics and reported adverse events of patients switched from LEV to BRV (2016-2020) were recorded at 3 months pre and 6- and 12-month post-BRV initiation. Outcomes were compared between PwID and those without and summarised using cross-tabulations and logistic regression models. A Bonferroni correction was applied. RESULTS: Of 77 participants, 46 had ID and 52% had a past psychiatric illness. 71% participants switched overnight from LEV to BRV. Seizure reduction of > 50% was seen in 40% patients. Psychiatric illness history was predictive of having neuropsychiatric side-effects with LEV but not BRV (p = 0.001). There was no significant difference for any primary outcomes between PwID versus without ID. CONCLUSIONS: Switching from LEV to BRV appears as well tolerated and efficacious in PwID as those without ID with over 90% still on BRV after 12 months.

Brivaracetam efficacy and tolerability in clinical practice: A UK-based retrospective multicenter service evaluation.

PURPOSE: This multicenter service evaluation explores the efficacy and tolerability of brivaracetam (BRV) in an unselected, consecutive population in 'real-life' clinical settings. METHOD: We retrospectively collected data from patient records at 11 UK hospitals and epilepsy centers. Consecutive patients prescribed BRV with at least 3 months of follow-up (FU) were included. Apart from reporting effectiveness and tolerability of BRV across the whole cohort, we compared treatment outcomes depending on previous levetiracetam use (LEV+ versus LEV-), comorbid learning disability (LD+ versus LD-), and epilepsy syndrome (focal versus generalized epilepsy). RESULTS: Two hundred and ninety patients (46% male, median age: 38 years, range: 15 to 77) with ≥3 months of FU were included. The median duration of BRV exposure was 12 months (range: 1 day to 72 months). Overall BRV retention was 71.1%. While 56.1% of patients improved in terms of seizure frequency category (daily, weekly, monthly, yearly seizures), 23.1% did not improve on this measure and 20.8% deteriorated. In terms of seizure frequency, 21% of patients experienced a ≥50% reduction, with 7.0% of all patients becoming seizure-free. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were reported by 107 (36.9%) patients, but there were no serious AEs. The commonest AEs were sedation/fatigue (18.3%), mood changes (9.0%), and irritability/aggression (4.8%). There were no significant differences in drug retention, seizure frequency outcomes, or AEs between the LEV+ and LEV- subgroups, or between patients with generalized or focal epilepsies. Although 15.5% of patients in the LD+ group achieved a ≥50% reduction, this rate was lower than in the LD- group. CONCLUSIONS: This 'real-life' evaluation suggests that reductions in seizure frequency can be achieved with BRV in patients with highly refractory epilepsy. Brivaracetam may be a useful treatment option in patients who have previously failed to respond to or tolerate LEV, those with LD, or (off-label) those with generalized epilepsies.

The feminisation of British neurology: implications for workforce planning.

As in other hospital specialties, an increasing proportion of neurology trainees are female. To predict the workforce implications it is necessary to determine what life choices future neurologists will make. A questionnaire survey of life choices was administered to neurology consultants and trainees, general medical senior house officers, and medical students. Of the 344 respondents, 3% of specialist registrars (SpRs) and 4.6% of consultants work part time. Eighty-seven per cent of female and 22% of male junior doctors plan to work part time for, on average, 7.5 and 1.5 years respectively. Thirty percent of consultants also plan to work part time. A number of SpRs (14.3%) and consultants (6%) have taken a career break while 37.5% of SpRs and 18.2% of consultants are planning a career break. The changing demands of both sexes will have a greater impact on the neurology workforce than the increasing proportion of women alone. Increased part-time working will require additional trainees to ensure service requirements are met.

Variability of antiepileptic medication taking behaviour in sudden unexplained death in epilepsy: hair analysis at autopsy.

BACKGROUND: Variable compliance with antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) is a potentially preventable cause of sudden unexplained death in epilepsy (SUDEP). Hair AED concentrations provide a retrospective insight into AED intake variability. METHODS: We compared hair AED concentration variability in patients with SUDEP (n = 16), non-SUDEP epilepsy related deaths (n = 9), epilepsy outpatients (n = 31), and epilepsy inpatients (n = 38). AED concentrations were measured in 1 cm hair segments using high performance liquid chromatography. Individual patient hair AED concentration profiles were corrected for "washout" using linear regression analysis. The coefficient of variation (CV) of the corrected mean hair AED concentration provided an index of variability of an individual's AED taking behaviour. Hair sample numbers varied between subjects, and so weighted regression estimates of the CV were derived for each group. RESULTS: The CV regression estimates for each group were: SUDEP 20.5% (standard error 1.9), non-SUDEP 15.0% (3.9), outpatients 9.6% (1.4), and inpatients 6.2% (2.7). The SUDEP group therefore showed greater hair AED concentration variability than either the outpatient or the inpatient groups (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Observed variability of hair AED concentrations, reflecting variable AED ingestion over time, is greater in patients dying from SUDEP than in either epilepsy outpatients or inpatients. SUDEP, at least in a proportion of cases, appears preventable.