Short-Term Impact of Seizures and Mitigation Opportunities.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The burden of epilepsy is complex and consists of elements directly related to acute seizures as well as those associated with living with a chronic neurologic disorder. The purpose of this systematic review was to characterize short-term burdens of seizures and to explore the potential value of acute treatments to mitigate these burdens apart from reducing the risk of status epilepticus. RECENT FINDINGS: A systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed to identify articles published from January 1, 2017, to June 22, 2023, that described short-term burdens and acute treatments of seizures. Primary outcomes included those related to short-term burdens of seizures and the benefits of acute treatments to reduce short-term burdens. Of the 1332 articles identified through PubMed and 17 through other sources, 27 had relevant outcomes and were included in the qualitative synthesis. Seizure emergencies negatively affected short-term quality of life and the ability to conduct normal daily living activities and were associated with physical (injury) and financial (emergency transport, hospitalization) burdens. The use of acute treatment was associated with a rapid return (≤ 1 h) to normal function/self for both patients and caregivers and potentially lower healthcare utilization and costs. Seizure action plans may improve knowledge and comfort with seizure care, empowering patients and caregivers. The short-term burden of seizures can create a substantial negative impact on patients and caregivers. Acute treatments may reduce the short-term burdens of seizures in addition to their well-described role to reduce seizure activity and the risk for status epilepticus.

Changes in Seizure Frequency and Antiepileptic Therapy during Pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Among women with epilepsy, studies regarding changes in seizure frequency during pregnancy have been limited by the lack of an appropriate nonpregnant comparator group to provide data on the natural course of seizure frequency in both groups. METHODS: In this prospective, observational, multicenter cohort study, we compared the frequency of seizures during pregnancy through the peripartum period (the first 6 weeks after birth) (epoch 1) with the frequency during the postpartum period (the following 7.5 months after pregnancy) (epoch 2). Nonpregnant women with epilepsy were enrolled as controls and had similar follow-up during an 18-month period. The primary outcome was the percentage of women who had a higher frequency of seizures that impaired awareness during epoch 1 than during epoch 2. We also compared changes in the doses of antiepileptic drugs that were administered in the two groups during the first 9 months of epoch 1. RESULTS: We enrolled 351 pregnant women and 109 controls with epilepsy. Among the 299 pregnant women and 93 controls who had a history of seizures that impaired awareness and who had available data for the two epochs, seizure frequency was higher during epoch 1 than during epoch 2 in 70 pregnant women (23%) and in 23 controls (25%) (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54 to 1.60). During pregnancy, the dose of an antiepileptic drug was changed at least once in 74% of pregnant women and in 31% of controls (odds ratio, 6.36; 95% CI, 3.82 to 10.59). CONCLUSIONS: Among women with epilepsy, the percentage who had a higher incidence of seizures during pregnancy than during the postpartum period was similar to that in women who were not pregnant during the corresponding epochs. Changes in doses of antiepileptic drugs occurred more frequently in pregnant women than in nonpregnant women during similar time periods. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; MONEAD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01730170.).

Written seizure action plans for adult patients with epilepsy: Distilling insights from emergency action plans for other chronic conditions.

Seizure emergencies and potential emergencies, ranging from seizure clusters to prolonged seizure and status epilepticus, may affect adults with epilepsy despite stable antiseizure therapy. Seizure action plans (SAPs) are designed for patients and their caregivers/care partners to provide guidance on the individualized treatment plan, including response to potential seizure emergencies and appropriate use of rescue therapy. The use of pediatric SAPs is common (typically required by schools), however, most adults with epilepsy do not have a plan. Patient-centered action plans are integral to care for other chronic conditions and may offer insights applicable to the care of adults with epilepsy. This review analyzes the potential benefits of action plans for medical conditions by exploring their utility in conditions such as asthma, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, heart disease, and opioid overdose. Evidence across these conditions substantiates the value of action plans for patients, and the benefits of adult SAPs in epilepsy are emerging. Because wide implementation of SAPs has faced barriers, other conditions may provide insights that are relevant to implementing SAPs in epilepsy. Based on these analyses, we propose concrete steps to improve the use of SAPs among adults. A recent consensus statement promoting the use of formal SAPs in epilepsy and advances in rescue therapy delivery methods provides support to engage patients around the value of SAPs. The precedent for use of SAPs for pediatric epilepsy patients serves as the foundation to support increased usage in adults. Seizure action plans in the context of improved clinical outcomes are expected to reduce healthcare utilization, improve patient quality of life, and optimize epilepsy management.

Effectiveness, safety and tolerability of perampanel by age group when used to treat people with focal and generalized epilepsy in clinical practice: The PERMIT Extension study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness and safety/tolerability of perampanel (PER) in people with epilepsy (PWE) treated in everyday clinical practice for focal and generalized seizures, both in the total cohort and by age group. METHODS: The PERMIT Extension study was a pooled analysis of data from PWE included in two large previous clinical practice studies (PERMIT and PROVE). Retention was assessed over 12 months. Effectiveness was assessed based on total seizures and by seizure type (focal and generalized) after 3, 6, and 12 months of PER treatment and at final follow-up (last observation carried forward; "last visit"); assessments included responder rate (≥50% seizure frequency reduction from baseline) and seizure freedom rate (no seizures since at least the previous visit). Safety/tolerability was assessed throughout PER treatment by evaluating adverse events (AEs). All assessments were conducted for the total population and by age category (<12, ≥12 to <18, ≥18 to <65, and ≥65 years at baseline). RESULTS: Full Analysis Set included 6,822 PWE (51.1% female; mean age, 36.9 years; mean duration of epilepsy 21.4 years) with 6,433, 4,648, and 6,233 PWE assessed for retention, effectiveness, and safety/tolerability, respectively. The majority of PWE (81.1%) were aged 18-64 at baseline, with 4.5% aged <12 years, 8.4% aged 12-17 years, and 5.9% aged ≥65 years. In the overall population, retention rates at 3, 6, and 12 months were 88.0%, 77.6%, and 61.4%, respectively; responder rates at 12 months were 58.5% for total seizures, 54.6% for focal seizures, and 77.7% for generalized seizures, and corresponding seizure freedom rates were 23.6%, 19.0%, and 51.3%, respectively. PER was effective regardless of age category, although effectiveness was greatest in PWE aged ≥65 years, for both focal and generalized seizures. In the overall population, the incidence of AEs was 49.2% and the most frequent AEs (≥5% of PWE) were dizziness/vertigo (13.4%), somnolence (8.8%), irritability (7.3%), and behavioral disorders (5.3%); AEs led to treatment discontinuation in 18.3% of PWE over 12 months. The incidence of AEs and the discontinuation rate due to AEs increased with increasing age (55.0% and 23.9%, respectively, in PWE aged ≥65 years). CONCLUSION: In this study, the largest pooled analysis of PER clinical practice data conducted to date, PER was shown to be effective and generally well tolerated when used to treat people with focal or generalized epilepsy in everyday clinical practice, regardless of age category. No new or unexpected side effects emerged following long-term use in the real-world setting.

Examining the patient and caregiver experience with diazepam nasal spray for seizure clusters: Results from an exit survey of a phase 3, open-label, repeat-dose safety study.

BACKGROUND: Ideal rescue treatments for acute treatment of seizure clusters should be easy to administer, so it is important to assess user perceptions of these treatments. Diazepam nasal spray is designed to have a rapid, noninvasive, and socially acceptable route of administration. Patient and caregiver (including care partner) responses to surveys from a phase 3 safety study of diazepam nasal spray are reported. METHODS: The study enrolled patients aged 6-65 years with seizure clusters. Surveys distributed to patients and caregivers at study end, completion, or discontinuation collected data on comfort using diazepam nasal spray outside the home, timing of administration and return to their usual selves, and comfort of use compared with rectal diazepam. Safety was assessed. RESULTS: Of 175 patients enrolled at the October 31, 2019, interim cutoff, 158 received diazepam nasal spray. Sixty-seven (42.4%) patients and 84 (53.2%) caregivers responded to the surveys (including 35 matched pairs). Most patients (78.8%, 52/66) responded that they were very comfortable doing activities outside the home with diazepam nasal spray available; 59.4% of patients returned to their usual selves within an hour of administration. Twenty-seven (40.3%) of these patients reported self-administration, 48% doing so at the first sign of a seizure. Administration of diazepam nasal spray was rated extremely or very easy by 93.8% of caregivers. Safety profile was consistent with diazepam rectal gel; no patient discontinued owing to treatment-emergent adverse events. Nasal discomfort was typically mild and transient. Among patients who had used diazepam rectal gel, most were not at all comfortable using it outside the home (86.7%) or at home (64.5%) compared with diazepam nasal spray, whereas caregivers reported that diazepam rectal gel was not at all easy to use compared with diazepam nasal spray. CONCLUSIONS: This survey from the phase 3 safety study of diazepam nasal spray shows that patients and caregivers were satisfied with, and more comfortable using, diazepam nasal spray than rectal diazepam in public. NCT02721069.

Recommendations for development of acute seizure action plans (ASAPs) from an expert panel.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Disease-related treatment action plans for acute exacerbations providing information that may be helpful for self-management for patients and caregivers are commonly used for chronic conditions such as asthma and diabetes. However, among patients with epilepsy, a review of the literature suggested that the majority did not have an action plan in place for acute seizure treatment. RECENT FINDINGS: Currently, there is a lack of unified guidance on seizure action plans (SAPs) in the literature. In the authors' opinion, available formats have limitations for practical use and may not be easily customizable to individual patients, and they are not often designed to provide simple-to-follow steps for rapid immediate steps to determine and initiate appropriate treatment of seizure emergencies. Our group reviewed current examples of SAPs and provided guidance on the development of acute seizure action plans (ASAPs) designed to facilitate rapid, appropriate acute care in the community and to be as useful as possible for a wide range of care partners, including those with limited experience. SUMMARY: This paper provides agreed upon expert opinion recommendations and considerations for goals, development process, types of content, and format for an ASAP.

Changes in antiepileptic drug-prescribing patterns in pregnant women with epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: We analyzed current prescribing patterns for antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in pregnant women with epilepsy (PWWE) at 20 USA tertiary epilepsy centers. METHODS: The Maternal Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs (MONEAD) study is an NIH-funded, prospective, observational, multicenter investigation of pregnancy outcomes for both mother and child, which enrolled women from December 2012 to January 2016. Inclusion criteria for PWWE included ages 14-45 years and up to 20 weeks gestational age. Exclusion criteria included history of psychogenic nonepileptic spells, expected intelligence quotient (IQ) <70, other major medical illness, progressive cerebral disease, and switching AEDs in pregnancy prior to enrollment. RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-one PWWE were enrolled in the MONEAD study, which included 259 (73.8%) on monotherapy, 77 (21.9%) on polytherapy, and 15 (4.3%) on no AEDs. The most common AED monotherapy regimens were lamotrigine (42.1% of monotherapies), levetiracetam (37.5%), carbamazepine (5.4%), zonisamide (5.0%), oxcarbazepine (4.6%), and topiramate (3.1%). All other individual monotherapies were each <1%. The most common AED polytherapy combination was lamotrigine + levetiracetam (42.9% of polytherapies), followed by lacosamide + levetiracetam (6.5%), lamotrigine + zonisamide (5.2%), and all other remaining combinations (each <4%); only 5.2% of polytherapy subjects were on ≥3 AEDs (1.1% of total PWWE). Only four subjects (1.1%) were on valproate (1 monotherapy, 3 polytherapy). CONCLUSIONS: The distribution of AED use likely reflects current prescribing patterns for PWWE cared for in USA tertiary epilepsy centers. This distribution has changed markedly since the turn of the century, but changes in the general population remain uncertain.

Benzodiazepines for the Treatment of Seizure Clusters.

Patients with epilepsy may experience seizure clusters, which are described by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as intermittent, stereotypic episodes of frequent seizure activity that are distinct from a patient's usual seizure pattern. Untreated seizure clusters may increase the risk for status epilepticus, as well as decrease quality of life and increase burden on patients and care partners. Benzodiazepine therapies are the mainstay for acute treatment of seizure clusters and are often administered by nonmedical care partners outside a healthcare facility. Three rescue therapies are currently FDA-approved for this indication, with diazepam rectal gel being the first in 1997, for patients aged ≥  2 years. Limitations of rectal administration (e.g., positioning and disrobing the patient, which may affect ease of use and social acceptability; interpatient variation in bioavailability) led to the investigation of the potential for nasal administration as an alternative. Midazolam nasal spray (MDS) was approved by the FDA in 2019 for patients aged ≥  12 years and diazepam nasal spray (DNS) in 2020 for patients aged ≥  6 years; these two intranasal therapies have differences in their formulations [e.g., organic solvents (MDS) vs. Intravail and vitamin E for absorption and solubility (DNS)], effectiveness (e.g., proportion of seizure clusters requiring only one dose), and safety profiles. In clinical studies, the proportion of seizure clusters for which only one dose of medication was used varied between the three approved rescue therapies with the highest single-dose rate for any time period for DNS; however, although studies for all three preparations enrolled patients with highly intractable epilepsy, inclusion and exclusion criteria varied, so the three cannot be directly compared. Treatments that have been used off-label for seizure clusters in the USA include midazolam for injection as an intranasal spray (indicated for sedation/anxiolysis/amnesia and anesthesia) and tablet forms of clonazepam (indicated for treatment for seizure disorders) and lorazepam (indicated for anxiety). In the European Union, buccal and intranasal midazolam are used for treating the indication of prolonged, acute convulsive seizures and rectal diazepam solution for the indication of epileptic and febrile convulsions; duration of effectiveness for these medications for the treatment of seizure clusters has not been established. This paper examines the literature context for understanding seizure clusters and their treatment and provides effectiveness, safety, and administration details for the three FDA-approved rescue therapies. Additionally, other medications that are used for rescue therapy in the USA and globally are discussed. Finally, the potential benefits of seizure action plans and candidates for their use are addressed. This paper is intended to provide details about the unique characteristics of rescue therapies for seizure clusters to help clarify appropriate treatment for individual patients.

Analyses of patients who self-administered diazepam nasal spray for acute treatment of seizure clusters.

For acute treatment of seizure clusters in patients with epilepsy, intranasal administration of acute seizure therapies has been shown to provide accessibility and ease of use to care partners as well as the potential for self-administration by patients. Diazepam nasal spray (Valtoco®) was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for acute treatment of intermittent, stereotypic episodes of frequent seizure activity (ie, seizure clusters, acute repetitive seizures) in patients with epilepsy aged ≥6 years. Self-administration consistent with the prescribing information is feasible and was reported by a subgroup of patients (n = 27 of 163) in a long-term phase 3 safety study. Data regarding self-administration among these patients with seizure clusters are examined here to explore the safety profiles and measures of effectiveness, as well as the quality of life of those who self-treated. In addition, this focused look at patients who self-administered diazepam nasal spray may offer some insights into the characteristics of patients who may be appropriate for self-administration.

Mood and Anxiety Disorders and Suicidality in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Focal Epilepsy: An Analysis of a Complex Comorbidity.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Mood, anxiety disorders, and suicidality are more frequent in people with epilepsy than in the general population. Yet, their prevalence and the types of mood and anxiety disorders associated with suicidality at the time of the epilepsy diagnosis are not established. We sought to answer these questions in patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy and to assess their association with suicidal ideation and attempts. METHODS: The data were derived from the Human Epilepsy Project study. A total of 347 consecutive adults aged 18-60 years with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy were enrolled within 4 months of starting treatment. The types of mood and anxiety disorders were identified with the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview, whereas suicidal ideation (lifetime, current, active, and passive) and suicidal attempts (lifetime and current) were established with the Columbia Suicidality Severity Rating Scale (CSSRS). Statistical analyses included the t test, χ2 statistics, and logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 151 (43.5%) patients had a psychiatric diagnosis; 134 (38.6%) met the criteria for a mood and/or anxiety disorder, and 75 (21.6%) reported suicidal ideation with or without attempts. Mood (23.6%) and anxiety (27.4%) disorders had comparable prevalence rates, whereas both disorders occurred together in 43 patients (12.4%). Major depressive disorders (MDDs) had a slightly higher prevalence than bipolar disorders (BPDs) (9.5% vs 6.9%, respectively). Explanatory variables of suicidality included MDD, BPD, panic disorders, and agoraphobia, with BPD and panic disorders being the strongest variables, particularly for active suicidal ideation and suicidal attempts. DISCUSSION: In patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy, the prevalence of mood, anxiety disorders, and suicidality is higher than in the general population and comparable to those of patients with established epilepsy. Their recognition at the time of the initial epilepsy evaluation is of the essence.

Perampanel in real-world clinical care of adolescent and adult patients with epilepsy: Results from the retrospective Phase IV PROVE Study.

PURPOSE: Report final data from adolescent (12-<18 years) and adult (≥18 years) patients from PROVE (NCT03208660), a multicenter, retrospective, non-interventional, Phase IV study to assess retention, efficacy, safety, and dosing of perampanel in patients with epilepsy during routine clinical care. METHODS: Data were retrospectively collected from medical/pharmacy records of patients in the US initiating perampanel after January 1, 2014, according to treating clinicians' recommendation. Retention rate was the primary efficacy endpoint. Secondary endpoints included median percent changes in seizure frequency, seizure-freedom rates, investigator's impression of seizure effect, and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). RESULTS: The Safety Analysis Set (SAS) included 294 adolescents and 1157 adults (median maximum perampanel dose, 6.0 mg/day). In patients eligible for inclusion in the retention rate analysis, 24-month retention rates were 53.5% (n=91/170) in adolescents and 47.8% (n=354/741) in adults. In patients with available efficacy data during Months 10-12, median percent seizure frequency reductions were 79.3% (n=20) in adolescents and 70.8% (n=92) in adults. Most patients in the SAS with seizure-effect data experienced an improvement in seizures at the last follow-up time point (adolescents, 51.4% [n=128/249]; adults, 52.3% [n=506/967]). TEAEs occurred in 113 adolescents (38.4%; most common, aggression [6.5%]) and 512 adults (44.3%; most common, dizziness [9.2%]). CONCLUSION: Perampanel demonstrated favorable retention rates and sustained efficacy (up to 2 years) in adolescent and adult patients during routine clinical care; no new safety signals were observed. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03208660 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03208660).

PROVE-Phase IV Study of Perampanel in Real-World Clinical Care of Patients with Epilepsy: Interim Analysis in Pediatric Patients.

PROVE is a retrospective, phase IV study assessing retention, dosing, efficacy, and safety of perampanel when administered to patients during routine clinical care. We report an interim analysis of preadolescent (1 to <12 years) and adolescent (12 to <18 years) patients. Data were obtained from medical records of patients with epilepsy initiating perampanel after January 1, 2014; cut-off date for this analysis was October 10, 2018. Overall, 151 preadolescent and 183 adolescent patients were included. Retention rates following 24 months on perampanel were 42.5% (preadolescent subgroup; n = 31/73) and 55.7% (adolescent subgroup; n = 54/97). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 53 (35.1%) preadolescent (most common: aggression, irritability, and somnolence) and 78 (42.6%) adolescent patients (most common: somnolence, aggression, and dizziness). These data indicate that daily oral doses of perampanel are generally well tolerated during routine clinical care, with favorable retention rates for ≤2 years, in patients aged 1 to <18 years.

Antiseizure Medication Concentrations During Pregnancy: Results From the Maternal Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs (MONEAD) Study.

IMPORTANCE: During pregnancy in women with epilepsy, lower blood concentrations of antiseizure medications can have adverse clinical consequences. OBJECTIVE: To characterize pregnancy-associated concentration changes for several antiseizure medications among women with epilepsy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Enrollment in this prospective, observational cohort study, Maternal Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs (MONEAD), occurred from December 19, 2012, to February 11, 2016, at 20 US sites. Enrolled cohorts included pregnant women with epilepsy and nonpregnant control participants with epilepsy. Inclusion criteria were women aged 14 to 45 years, an intelligence quotient greater than 70 points, and, for the cohort of pregnant women, a fetal gestational age younger than 20 weeks. A total of 1087 women were assessed for eligibility; 397 were excluded and 230 declined. Data were analyzed from May 1, 2014, to June 30, 2021. EXPOSURE: Medication plasma concentrations in women taking monotherapy or in combination with noninteracting medications. The cohort of pregnant women was monitored through 9 months post partum, with similar time points for control participants. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Dose-normalized concentrations were calculated as total or unbound plasma medication concentrations divided by total daily dose. Phlebotomy was performed during 4 pregnancy study visits and 3 postpartum visits for the pregnant women and 7 visits over 18 months for control participants. The primary hypothesis was to test pregnancy changes of dose-normalized concentrations from nonpregnant postpartum samples compared with those of control participants. RESULTS: Of the 351 pregnant women and 109 control participants enrolled in MONEAD, 326 pregnant women (median [range] age, 29 [19-43] years) and 104 control participants (median [range] age, 29 [16-43] years) met eligibility criteria for this analysis. Compared with postpartum values, dose-normalized concentrations during pregnancy were decreased by up to 56.1% for lamotrigine (15.60 µg/L/mg to 6.85 µg/L/mg; P < .001), 36.8% for levetiracetam (11.33 µg/L/mg to 7.16 µg/L/mg; P < .001), 17.3% for carbamazepine (11.56 µg/L/mg to 7.97 µg/L/mg; P = .03), 32.6% for oxcarbazepine (11.55 µg/L/mg to 7.79 µg/L/mg; P < .001), 30.6% for unbound oxcarbazepine (6.15 µg/L/mg to 4.27 µg/L/mg; P < .001), 39.9% for lacosamide (26.14 µg/L/mg to 15.71 µg/L/mg; P < .001), and 29.8% for zonisamide (40.12 µg/L/mg to 28.15 µg/L/mg; P < .001). No significant changes occurred for unbound carbamazepine, carbamazepine-10,11-epoxide, and topiramate, although a decrease was observed for topiramate (29.83 µg/L/mg to 13.77 µg/L/mg; P = .18). Additionally, compared with dose-normalized concentrations from control participants, pregnancy dose-normalized median (SE) concentrations decreased significantly by week of gestational age: carbamazepine, -0.14 (0.06) µg/L/mg (P = .02); carbamazepine unbound, -0.04 (0.01) µg/L/mg (P = .01); lacosamide, -0.23 (0.07) µg/L/mg (P < .001); lamotrigine, -0.20 (0.02) µg/L/mg (P < .001); levetiracetam, -0.06 (0.03) µg/L/mg (P = .01); oxcarbazepine, -0.14 (0.04) µg/L/mg (P < .001); oxcarbazepine unbound, -0.11 (0.03) µg/L/mg (P < .001); and zonisamide, -0.53 (0.14) µg/L/mg (P < .001) except for topiramate (-0.35 [0.20] µg/L/mg per week) and carbamazepine-10,11-epoxide (0.02 [0.01] µg/L/mg). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Study results suggest that therapeutic drug monitoring should begin early in pregnancy and that increasing doses of these anticonvulsants may be needed throughout the course of pregnancy.

The Effect of Epilepsy on Sleep Quality During Pregnancy and Postpartum.

OBJECTIVE: This study seeks to understand how sleep is affected in pregnant women with epilepsy (WWE) relative to healthy pregnant women during pregnancy and postpartum and to non-pregnant WWE during comparative time periods. BACKGROUND: Sleep impacts maternal health and mood during pregnancy. Maternal sleep disturbances are related to poor fetal growth and increased fetal deaths. Epilepsy is the most common neurologic condition in pregnancy. Sleep disruption can worsen epileptic seizures. The interplay between epilepsy, pregnancy, and sleep is poorly understood. DESIGN: /Methods: The Maternal Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs (MONEAD) study is an NIH-funded, prospective, observational, multicenter study, enrolling women from December 2012 through January 2016. Sleep quality was assessed utilizing the average Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index collected during pregnancy; postpartum; or analogous time periods. Sleep scores range from 0 to 21 with higher scores indicating worse sleep quality; scores > 5 are associated with poor sleep quality. RESULTS: Of 351 pregnant WWE, 105 healthy pregnant women, and 109 non-pregnant WWE enrolled in MONEAD, data from 241 pregnant WWE, 74 healthy pregnant women, and 84 non-pregnant WWE were analyzed. Pregnant WWE had worse sleep (higher mean sleep score) during pregnancy compared to healthy pregnant women in unadjusted analysis (p=0.006), but no longer significant in adjusted analysis (p=0.062), pregnant WWE (least square mean sleep score (95% CI) = 5.8 (5.5, 6.1)) vs. healthy pregnant women (5.1 (4.6, 5.7)). During postpartum, pregnant WWE (5.6 (5.4, 5.9)) had similarly impaired sleep compared to healthy pregnant women (5.7 (5.2, 6.2); adjusted p=0.838). Sleep was significantly worse in pregnant WWE vs non-pregnant WWE (for comparable time period) in pregnancy and postpartum in unadjusted and adjusted analyses. Adjusted scores for pregnant WWE in pregnancy (5.7 (5.4, 6.0)) and postpartum (5.7 (5.4, 6.0)) compared to non-pregnant WWE (4.7 (4.2, 5.3); p=0.002) and (4.1 (3.6, 4.7); p<0.001), respectively. Sleep quality between pregnancy and postpartum varied only in healthy pregnant women (change in mean score = 0.8 (0.2, 1.3); p=0.01), whose sleep was worse in postpartum. CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant WWE had worse sleep during pregnancy and postpartum than non-pregnant WWE during comparable periods in the adjusted analysis.The study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01730170.

Prospective Cohort Study of Depression During Pregnancy and the Postpartum Period in Women With Epilepsy vs Control Groups.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Assess the incidence and factors associated with major depressive episodes (MDEs) and symptoms of depression and anxiety during pregnancy and postpartum periods in pregnant women with epilepsy (PWWE) compared with healthy pregnant women (HPW) and nonpregnant women with epilepsy (NPWWE) in comparable timeframes. Previous studies have reported higher rates of postpartum depression in women with epilepsy compared with women without epilepsy. However, the incidence of MDE using a structured interview during pregnancy and postpartum has not been directly compared with control groups, and the comparison of depression and anxiety symptoms and the role of associated factors remain ambiguous. METHODS: The Maternal Outcomes and Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs study is a multicenter NIH-funded prospective observational parallel group cohort study of PWWE and their children. This report examines mood disorders. Unlike previous epilepsy pregnancy studies, the Structured Clinical Interview for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV (SCID) provided lifetime diagnoses, and repeated SCID mood modules assessed for MDE, the a priori primary outcome. Symptoms of depression (Beck Depression Inventory [BDI] and Edinburg Postnatal Depression Scale [EPDS]) and anxiety (Beck Anxiety Inventory [BAI]) were also assessed along with multiple clinical factors. RESULTS: This study included PWWE (n = 331) and HPW (n = 102) during pregnancy and postpartum and NPWWE (n = 102) at comparable times. No difference in SCID-diagnosed MDE incidence was found across groups, but BDI depressive symptoms were worse during pregnancy in PWWE vs NPWWE and during postpartum vs HPW and NPWWE. BAI anxiety symptoms were worse during pregnancy in PWWE vs HPW and NPWWE and during postpartum vs HPW. Factors associated with MDE during pregnancy/postpartum for PWWE included >1 seizure/90 days, anticonvulsant polytherapy, unplanned pregnancy, and lifetime history of mood disorder. Suicidal ideation from BDI or EPDS was related to BAI anxiety symptoms. DISCUSSION: Although SCID-based MDE did not differ across groups, this prospective study confirms higher rates of psychiatric symptoms in patients with epilepsy during pregnancy and postpartum, provides new data on associated factors, and underscores the importance of anxiety in risk for depression and thoughts of death/dying or suicide. Given the risks, PWWE should be routinely assessed and symptomatic patients should be offered treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT01730170.

More effective assessment of adverse effects and comorbidities in epilepsy: results of a Phase II communication study.

Research was conducted to evaluate conversations about epilepsy between community-based neurologists and patients. Adverse effects of antiepileptic drugs and mood/behavioral issues were infrequently discussed, and neurologists and patients disagreed about these issues postvisit. Follow-up research was conducted to assess the impact of a previsit assessment tool on discussions of epilepsy. Twenty neurologists reviewed a tool incorporating questions from validated instruments (Adverse Events Profile [AEP] and Neurological Disorders Depression Inventory for Epilepsy [NDDI-E]). Naturally occurring interactions between neurologists and 60 patients were recorded. Neurologists and patients were interviewed separately. All components were transcribed and analyzed using sociolinguistics. Using the previsit assessment tool increased the number of discussions about adverse effects and mood/behavioral issues and increased neurologist-patient agreement about issues postvisit. Visit length did not increase significantly when the tool was used. Ten months after follow-up research, 50% of neurologists reported continuing to use the tool in everyday practice with patients with epilepsy.

Epilepsy Seizure Clusters: Therapeutic Advances and Emergency Plans.

Many patients with epilepsy experience seizure clusters, which have consequences such as problems at school or work and decreased quality of life. However, according to the Seizure Cluster Burden of Illness US Study, only one-third of patients report having a seizure emergency plan. Research also suggests that patients and caregivers often respond differently to emergency situations than their clinicians recommend. Multiple options are available for the acute treatment of seizure clusters, and newer nasal spray formulations can easily be used. Seizure Action Plans and Acute Emergency Seizure Action Plans provide direction that may alleviate fear and hospitalization, benefitting the patient and caregiver and the health care system.

New Options for Rescue Treatment in Individuals With Epilepsy Seizure Clusters.

Seizure clusters are common occurrences among patients living with epilepsy. Seizure clustering has a significant impact on patients' emotional wellbeing, work, and quality of life and is associated with increased use of emergency departments. However, rescue treatment options have been limited, impractical, and often rejected by patients. With the advent of nasal spray formulations of seizure rescue treatment, clinicians can offer an option that is easily used. With 75% of patients in the Seizure Cluster Burden of Illness US Study somewhat or strongly agreeing that they live in fear of having a seizure at any time and 70% of adult patients reporting that they do not have a seizure response plan, it is critical that patients adopt Seizure Action Plans and Acute Seizure Action Plans. This report addresses the use of rescue medications and emergency plans to provide treatment for seizure clusters that patients and their caregivers will use.

Epilepsy Treatment Complacency in Patients, Caregivers, and Health Care Professionals.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the perspectives of adult patients with epilepsy, caregivers, and health care professionals (HCPs) on treatment for seizures and treatment decisions, we developed and administered the STEP Survey (Seize the Truth of Epilepsy Perceptions). METHODS: Participants were recruited from online panel M3 and by Rare Patient Voice and completed the self-administered online STEP Survey. Analysis of variance and chi-square tests were used for group comparisons. RESULTS: The STEP Survey was completed by 400 adult patients, 201 caregivers, and 258 HCPs. Patients estimated reporting 45% of their seizures to their HCP, whereas caregivers estimated 83% and HCPs estimated 73% were reported. The most common reason for not reporting seizures was that the seizures were not serious enough to mention (patients 57%; caregivers 66%). A minority of patients (25%) and caregivers (30%) were very or extremely likely to ask their HCP about changing antiseizure medication (ASM) in the next 12 months. The HCP was most frequently selected by patients, caregivers, and HCPs as the person who initiates discussion of changing ASMs (patients 73%/caregivers 66%/HCPs 75%) and increasing ASM dosage (patients 77%/caregivers 68%/HCPs 81%). A majority of patients (65%) and caregivers (68%) somewhat or strongly agreed that they do not change ASMs due to fear of getting worse. HCPs perceive this fear less often, stating that 50% of their patients feel afraid when a second ASM was added. CONCLUSIONS: Improved reporting of all seizures, discussion of treatment changes, and the impact of fear on treatment decisions provide opportunities to reduce complacency and optimize patient outcomes.