Adjunctive lacosamide in clinical practice: Sodium blockade with a difference?

Abstract Lacosamide (LCM) was licensed in the United Kingdom in 2008 for the adjunctive treatment of partial-onset seizures. It exerts its effect by enhancing sodium channel slow inactivation. This article reports preliminary outcomes with adjunctive LCM in the everyday clinical setting. To date, 11...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Epilepsy & behavior 2011-11, Vol.22 (3), p.499-504
Hauptverfasser: Stephen, Linda J, Kelly, Kevin, Parker, Pamela, Brodie, Martin J
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 504
container_issue 3
container_start_page 499
container_title Epilepsy & behavior
container_volume 22
creator Stephen, Linda J
Kelly, Kevin
Parker, Pamela
Brodie, Martin J
description Abstract Lacosamide (LCM) was licensed in the United Kingdom in 2008 for the adjunctive treatment of partial-onset seizures. It exerts its effect by enhancing sodium channel slow inactivation. This article reports preliminary outcomes with adjunctive LCM in the everyday clinical setting. To date, 113 patients (57 males, 56 females; aged range = 18–74 years, median = 39 years) with uncontrolled partial-onset seizures (monthly frequency range = 1–300, median = 4) have been included in the audit. Patients were taking 1–4 (median = 1) antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), having previously tried 1–12 (median 3) drug schedules. After 12 weeks on stable AED dosing, LCM was added, aiming at an initial target range of 200–400 mg/day. Review took place every 6–8 weeks until one of four endpoints was reached: seizure freedom for ≥ 6 months on a given LCM dose; ≥ 50% (responder) or < 50% (marginal benefit) seizure reduction over 6 months compared with baseline on the highest tolerated LCM dose; withdrawal of LCM because of lack of efficacy, side effects, or both. An endpoint has been reached by 65 (57.5%) patients so far. Seventeen (26.2%) have remained seizure free on a median daily LCM dose of 100 mg (range = 50–300 mg). Patients were more likely to become seizure free when LCM was used as a first add-on (15/36, 41.7%), compared with a later treatment schedule (1/27, 3.7%, P = 0.001). With appropriate dose manipulation, patients taking traditional sodium blockers (5/26, 19.2%) were as likely to become seizure free as those taking AEDs with other mechanisms of action only (11/37, 29.7%). Fifty percent or greater seizure reduction was achieved in an additional 16 (24.6%) patients (1 monotherapy); 18 (27.7%) reported marginal benefit. Two patients were established on LCM monotherapy (one seizure free, one responder). Patients remaining on LCM were as likely to also be taking sodium blockers only (23/27, 85.1%) as AEDs with other mechanisms (26/36, 72.2%). LCM was withdrawn in 14 patients (12.3% of ongoing patients, 21.5% of those at an endpoint; 10 for side effects, 4 for lack of efficacy). The most common side effects leading to withdrawal were sedation, ataxia, and dizziness. Of the 10 with side effects, only 2 patients took concomitant sodium blockers. Patients on sodium valproate were more likely to discontinue LCM (8/21, P = 0.018) than those also taking other AEDs; 5 of the 8 did so because of side effects and 3 because of lack of efficacy. In patients with partial-onset
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.yebeh.2011.07.035
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_907176667</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S1525505011004458</els_id><sourcerecordid>907176667</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-5505108e284b48598cce914eafd9c329a6ecb52eff9f6ac4c082f6caf165b1993</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkc1u1TAQRi1ERUvhCZBQdqxu8DixEyNBVVW0VKpgUVhbzmSsOs3PxU6K7tvjcNsuuikrW_L5xqPzMfYOeA4c1Mcu31FDN7ngADmvcl7IF-wIpJAbyZV--XiX_JC9jrHjCZQFvGKHAmrNSwFH7Ptp2y0jzv6Ost7iFO3gW8r8mGHvR4-2z7bBpnekT9n11PplyJp-wlubqD9-vsls1nrnKNCIdPKGHTjbR3p7fx6zX-dff55921z9uLg8O73aYFnKeSPTUsBrEnXZlLXUNSJpKMm6VmMhtFWEjRTknHbKYom8Fk6hdaBkA1oXx-zDfu42TL8XirMZfETqezvStESjeQWVUqr6DxJUKYqiTmSxJzFMMQZyZhv8YMPOADercdOZf8bNatzwyiTjKfX-fv7SDNQ-Zh4UJ-DzHqDk485TMBH9Kqv1gXA27eSf-eDLk_xDM7e0o9hNSxiTagMmCsPN9Vr62jkA50l2XfwFqhynGw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>901642338</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Adjunctive lacosamide in clinical practice: Sodium blockade with a difference?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Stephen, Linda J ; Kelly, Kevin ; Parker, Pamela ; Brodie, Martin J</creator><creatorcontrib>Stephen, Linda J ; Kelly, Kevin ; Parker, Pamela ; Brodie, Martin J</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Lacosamide (LCM) was licensed in the United Kingdom in 2008 for the adjunctive treatment of partial-onset seizures. It exerts its effect by enhancing sodium channel slow inactivation. This article reports preliminary outcomes with adjunctive LCM in the everyday clinical setting. To date, 113 patients (57 males, 56 females; aged range = 18–74 years, median = 39 years) with uncontrolled partial-onset seizures (monthly frequency range = 1–300, median = 4) have been included in the audit. Patients were taking 1–4 (median = 1) antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), having previously tried 1–12 (median 3) drug schedules. After 12 weeks on stable AED dosing, LCM was added, aiming at an initial target range of 200–400 mg/day. Review took place every 6–8 weeks until one of four endpoints was reached: seizure freedom for ≥ 6 months on a given LCM dose; ≥ 50% (responder) or &lt; 50% (marginal benefit) seizure reduction over 6 months compared with baseline on the highest tolerated LCM dose; withdrawal of LCM because of lack of efficacy, side effects, or both. An endpoint has been reached by 65 (57.5%) patients so far. Seventeen (26.2%) have remained seizure free on a median daily LCM dose of 100 mg (range = 50–300 mg). Patients were more likely to become seizure free when LCM was used as a first add-on (15/36, 41.7%), compared with a later treatment schedule (1/27, 3.7%, P = 0.001). With appropriate dose manipulation, patients taking traditional sodium blockers (5/26, 19.2%) were as likely to become seizure free as those taking AEDs with other mechanisms of action only (11/37, 29.7%). Fifty percent or greater seizure reduction was achieved in an additional 16 (24.6%) patients (1 monotherapy); 18 (27.7%) reported marginal benefit. Two patients were established on LCM monotherapy (one seizure free, one responder). Patients remaining on LCM were as likely to also be taking sodium blockers only (23/27, 85.1%) as AEDs with other mechanisms (26/36, 72.2%). LCM was withdrawn in 14 patients (12.3% of ongoing patients, 21.5% of those at an endpoint; 10 for side effects, 4 for lack of efficacy). The most common side effects leading to withdrawal were sedation, ataxia, and dizziness. Of the 10 with side effects, only 2 patients took concomitant sodium blockers. Patients on sodium valproate were more likely to discontinue LCM (8/21, P = 0.018) than those also taking other AEDs; 5 of the 8 did so because of side effects and 3 because of lack of efficacy. In patients with partial-onset seizures, LCM is an effective and well-tolerated adjunctive AED when combined with appropriate doses of traditional sodium blockers, as well as agents with other mechanisms of action. Seizure freedom was more likely when LCM was used as a first add-on compared with a later treatment schedule. Patients also taking sodium valproate were significantly more likely to discontinue LCM compared with those taking other AEDs. These data suggest that the pharmacological effect of LCM differs importantly from that of AEDs that influence fast inactivation of the sodium channel.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1525-5050</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1525-5069</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2011.07.035</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21890421</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Acetamides - therapeutic use ; Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Anticonvulsants - therapeutic use ; Antiepileptic drug ; Clinical Trials as Topic ; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug ; Drug Administration Schedule ; Drug Interactions ; Epilepsies, Partial - drug therapy ; Epilepsy ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Lacosamide ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Neurology ; Retrospective Studies ; Sodium blockade ; Time Factors ; Treatment Outcome ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Epilepsy &amp; behavior, 2011-11, Vol.22 (3), p.499-504</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>2011 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-5505108e284b48598cce914eafd9c329a6ecb52eff9f6ac4c082f6caf165b1993</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-5505108e284b48598cce914eafd9c329a6ecb52eff9f6ac4c082f6caf165b1993</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.yebeh.2011.07.035$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3549,27923,27924,45994</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21890421$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Stephen, Linda J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kelly, Kevin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parker, Pamela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brodie, Martin J</creatorcontrib><title>Adjunctive lacosamide in clinical practice: Sodium blockade with a difference?</title><title>Epilepsy &amp; behavior</title><addtitle>Epilepsy Behav</addtitle><description>Abstract Lacosamide (LCM) was licensed in the United Kingdom in 2008 for the adjunctive treatment of partial-onset seizures. It exerts its effect by enhancing sodium channel slow inactivation. This article reports preliminary outcomes with adjunctive LCM in the everyday clinical setting. To date, 113 patients (57 males, 56 females; aged range = 18–74 years, median = 39 years) with uncontrolled partial-onset seizures (monthly frequency range = 1–300, median = 4) have been included in the audit. Patients were taking 1–4 (median = 1) antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), having previously tried 1–12 (median 3) drug schedules. After 12 weeks on stable AED dosing, LCM was added, aiming at an initial target range of 200–400 mg/day. Review took place every 6–8 weeks until one of four endpoints was reached: seizure freedom for ≥ 6 months on a given LCM dose; ≥ 50% (responder) or &lt; 50% (marginal benefit) seizure reduction over 6 months compared with baseline on the highest tolerated LCM dose; withdrawal of LCM because of lack of efficacy, side effects, or both. An endpoint has been reached by 65 (57.5%) patients so far. Seventeen (26.2%) have remained seizure free on a median daily LCM dose of 100 mg (range = 50–300 mg). Patients were more likely to become seizure free when LCM was used as a first add-on (15/36, 41.7%), compared with a later treatment schedule (1/27, 3.7%, P = 0.001). With appropriate dose manipulation, patients taking traditional sodium blockers (5/26, 19.2%) were as likely to become seizure free as those taking AEDs with other mechanisms of action only (11/37, 29.7%). Fifty percent or greater seizure reduction was achieved in an additional 16 (24.6%) patients (1 monotherapy); 18 (27.7%) reported marginal benefit. Two patients were established on LCM monotherapy (one seizure free, one responder). Patients remaining on LCM were as likely to also be taking sodium blockers only (23/27, 85.1%) as AEDs with other mechanisms (26/36, 72.2%). LCM was withdrawn in 14 patients (12.3% of ongoing patients, 21.5% of those at an endpoint; 10 for side effects, 4 for lack of efficacy). The most common side effects leading to withdrawal were sedation, ataxia, and dizziness. Of the 10 with side effects, only 2 patients took concomitant sodium blockers. Patients on sodium valproate were more likely to discontinue LCM (8/21, P = 0.018) than those also taking other AEDs; 5 of the 8 did so because of side effects and 3 because of lack of efficacy. In patients with partial-onset seizures, LCM is an effective and well-tolerated adjunctive AED when combined with appropriate doses of traditional sodium blockers, as well as agents with other mechanisms of action. Seizure freedom was more likely when LCM was used as a first add-on compared with a later treatment schedule. Patients also taking sodium valproate were significantly more likely to discontinue LCM compared with those taking other AEDs. These data suggest that the pharmacological effect of LCM differs importantly from that of AEDs that influence fast inactivation of the sodium channel.</description><subject>Acetamides - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Anticonvulsants - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Antiepileptic drug</subject><subject>Clinical Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Dose-Response Relationship, Drug</subject><subject>Drug Administration Schedule</subject><subject>Drug Interactions</subject><subject>Epilepsies, Partial - drug therapy</subject><subject>Epilepsy</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Lacosamide</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Neurology</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Sodium blockade</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>1525-5050</issn><issn>1525-5069</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkc1u1TAQRi1ERUvhCZBQdqxu8DixEyNBVVW0VKpgUVhbzmSsOs3PxU6K7tvjcNsuuikrW_L5xqPzMfYOeA4c1Mcu31FDN7ngADmvcl7IF-wIpJAbyZV--XiX_JC9jrHjCZQFvGKHAmrNSwFH7Ptp2y0jzv6Ost7iFO3gW8r8mGHvR4-2z7bBpnekT9n11PplyJp-wlubqD9-vsls1nrnKNCIdPKGHTjbR3p7fx6zX-dff55921z9uLg8O73aYFnKeSPTUsBrEnXZlLXUNSJpKMm6VmMhtFWEjRTknHbKYom8Fk6hdaBkA1oXx-zDfu42TL8XirMZfETqezvStESjeQWVUqr6DxJUKYqiTmSxJzFMMQZyZhv8YMPOADercdOZf8bNatzwyiTjKfX-fv7SDNQ-Zh4UJ-DzHqDk485TMBH9Kqv1gXA27eSf-eDLk_xDM7e0o9hNSxiTagMmCsPN9Vr62jkA50l2XfwFqhynGw</recordid><startdate>20111101</startdate><enddate>20111101</enddate><creator>Stephen, Linda J</creator><creator>Kelly, Kevin</creator><creator>Parker, Pamela</creator><creator>Brodie, Martin J</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7TK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20111101</creationdate><title>Adjunctive lacosamide in clinical practice: Sodium blockade with a difference?</title><author>Stephen, Linda J ; Kelly, Kevin ; Parker, Pamela ; Brodie, Martin J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c445t-5505108e284b48598cce914eafd9c329a6ecb52eff9f6ac4c082f6caf165b1993</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Acetamides - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Anticonvulsants - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Antiepileptic drug</topic><topic>Clinical Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Dose-Response Relationship, Drug</topic><topic>Drug Administration Schedule</topic><topic>Drug Interactions</topic><topic>Epilepsies, Partial - drug therapy</topic><topic>Epilepsy</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Lacosamide</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Neurology</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Sodium blockade</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Stephen, Linda J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kelly, Kevin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Parker, Pamela</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brodie, Martin J</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Epilepsy &amp; behavior</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Stephen, Linda J</au><au>Kelly, Kevin</au><au>Parker, Pamela</au><au>Brodie, Martin J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Adjunctive lacosamide in clinical practice: Sodium blockade with a difference?</atitle><jtitle>Epilepsy &amp; behavior</jtitle><addtitle>Epilepsy Behav</addtitle><date>2011-11-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>22</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>499</spage><epage>504</epage><pages>499-504</pages><issn>1525-5050</issn><eissn>1525-5069</eissn><abstract>Abstract Lacosamide (LCM) was licensed in the United Kingdom in 2008 for the adjunctive treatment of partial-onset seizures. It exerts its effect by enhancing sodium channel slow inactivation. This article reports preliminary outcomes with adjunctive LCM in the everyday clinical setting. To date, 113 patients (57 males, 56 females; aged range = 18–74 years, median = 39 years) with uncontrolled partial-onset seizures (monthly frequency range = 1–300, median = 4) have been included in the audit. Patients were taking 1–4 (median = 1) antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), having previously tried 1–12 (median 3) drug schedules. After 12 weeks on stable AED dosing, LCM was added, aiming at an initial target range of 200–400 mg/day. Review took place every 6–8 weeks until one of four endpoints was reached: seizure freedom for ≥ 6 months on a given LCM dose; ≥ 50% (responder) or &lt; 50% (marginal benefit) seizure reduction over 6 months compared with baseline on the highest tolerated LCM dose; withdrawal of LCM because of lack of efficacy, side effects, or both. An endpoint has been reached by 65 (57.5%) patients so far. Seventeen (26.2%) have remained seizure free on a median daily LCM dose of 100 mg (range = 50–300 mg). Patients were more likely to become seizure free when LCM was used as a first add-on (15/36, 41.7%), compared with a later treatment schedule (1/27, 3.7%, P = 0.001). With appropriate dose manipulation, patients taking traditional sodium blockers (5/26, 19.2%) were as likely to become seizure free as those taking AEDs with other mechanisms of action only (11/37, 29.7%). Fifty percent or greater seizure reduction was achieved in an additional 16 (24.6%) patients (1 monotherapy); 18 (27.7%) reported marginal benefit. Two patients were established on LCM monotherapy (one seizure free, one responder). Patients remaining on LCM were as likely to also be taking sodium blockers only (23/27, 85.1%) as AEDs with other mechanisms (26/36, 72.2%). LCM was withdrawn in 14 patients (12.3% of ongoing patients, 21.5% of those at an endpoint; 10 for side effects, 4 for lack of efficacy). The most common side effects leading to withdrawal were sedation, ataxia, and dizziness. Of the 10 with side effects, only 2 patients took concomitant sodium blockers. Patients on sodium valproate were more likely to discontinue LCM (8/21, P = 0.018) than those also taking other AEDs; 5 of the 8 did so because of side effects and 3 because of lack of efficacy. In patients with partial-onset seizures, LCM is an effective and well-tolerated adjunctive AED when combined with appropriate doses of traditional sodium blockers, as well as agents with other mechanisms of action. Seizure freedom was more likely when LCM was used as a first add-on compared with a later treatment schedule. Patients also taking sodium valproate were significantly more likely to discontinue LCM compared with those taking other AEDs. These data suggest that the pharmacological effect of LCM differs importantly from that of AEDs that influence fast inactivation of the sodium channel.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>21890421</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.yebeh.2011.07.035</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1525-5050
ispartof Epilepsy & behavior, 2011-11, Vol.22 (3), p.499-504
issn 1525-5050
1525-5069
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_907176667
source MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)
subjects Acetamides - therapeutic use
Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Anticonvulsants - therapeutic use
Antiepileptic drug
Clinical Trials as Topic
Dose-Response Relationship, Drug
Drug Administration Schedule
Drug Interactions
Epilepsies, Partial - drug therapy
Epilepsy
Female
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Lacosamide
Male
Middle Aged
Neurology
Retrospective Studies
Sodium blockade
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Young Adult
title Adjunctive lacosamide in clinical practice: Sodium blockade with a difference?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T22%3A39%3A49IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Adjunctive%20lacosamide%20in%20clinical%20practice:%20Sodium%20blockade%20with%20a%20difference?&rft.jtitle=Epilepsy%20&%20behavior&rft.au=Stephen,%20Linda%20J&rft.date=2011-11-01&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=499&rft.epage=504&rft.pages=499-504&rft.issn=1525-5050&rft.eissn=1525-5069&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.yebeh.2011.07.035&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E907176667%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=901642338&rft_id=info:pmid/21890421&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S1525505011004458&rfr_iscdi=true