Cargando…

Real‐world analysis of hospitalizations in patients with epilepsy and treated with perampanel

OBJECTIVES: (1) To evaluate risk of hospitalization following initiation of perampanel (pre‐ and post‐analysis) and (2) to compare hospitalization rates following initiation of perampanel vs lacosamide. METHODS: Patients were identified from Symphony Health's Patient Integrated Database if they...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Faught, Edward, Li, Xuan, Choi, Jiyoon, Malhotra, Manoj, Knoth, Russell L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8633480/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34170633
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/epi4.12515
_version_ 1784607935762006016
author Faught, Edward
Li, Xuan
Choi, Jiyoon
Malhotra, Manoj
Knoth, Russell L.
author_facet Faught, Edward
Li, Xuan
Choi, Jiyoon
Malhotra, Manoj
Knoth, Russell L.
author_sort Faught, Edward
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: (1) To evaluate risk of hospitalization following initiation of perampanel (pre‐ and post‐analysis) and (2) to compare hospitalization rates following initiation of perampanel vs lacosamide. METHODS: Patients were identified from Symphony Health's Patient Integrated Database if they had a prescription for perampanel (July 1, 2014‐June 30, 2016). Patients 4‐11 years of age with any partial‐onset seizure (POS) or ≥12 years of age with any POS or primary generalized tonic‐clonic seizure (GTCS) (pre‐post); or ≥12 years of age (perampanel vs lacosamide). The first fill of perampanel (“index date”) marked the start of the analysis period. Patients had ≥1 additional fill for perampanel and ≥2 diagnoses for epilepsy or nonfebrile convulsion diagnosis during pre‐index (based on ICD‐9/ICD‐10 codes). Patients were matched using a 1:1 propensity scoring method for the perampanel vs lacosamide analysis. Primary outcome was hospitalization during the one year following medication initiation. RESULTS: Pre‐ and post‐perampanel: N = 1771 (mean age 34 years, 55% female). One‐year all‐cause hospitalization risk ratio was 0.76 (P < .05) and 36.2% with hospitalization during the pre‐period vs 29.5% in the follow‐up. One‐year epilepsy‐related inpatient hospitalization risk ratio was 0.72 (P < .05) and 30.8% with hospitalization during the pre‐period vs 23.9% during follow‐up. In the perampanel and lacosamide cohorts, N = 1717 per cohort after matching, most baseline demographics were balanced. A higher percentage of subjects were prescribed ≥3 anti‐seizure medications for perampanel vs lacosamide (60.5% vs 57.7%, P < .001). The perampanel cohort had a 9.6% reduction in all‐cause hospitalizations vs 5.8% for the lacosamide cohort (P < .05). Epilepsy‐related hospitalizations decreased from the pre‐index rate by 9.9% for perampanel and 8.3% for lacosamide (P < .05). Among those with baseline hospitalizations, perampanel was associated with a 59.9% reduction in all‐cause hospitalizations vs 48.6% for lacosamide (P < .05), and for epilepsy‐related hospitalizations, a reduction of 65.0% vs 58.9%, respectively (P < .05). SIGNIFICANCE: Perampanel was associated with a significant reduction in one‐year hospitalization risk.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8633480
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86334802021-12-06 Real‐world analysis of hospitalizations in patients with epilepsy and treated with perampanel Faught, Edward Li, Xuan Choi, Jiyoon Malhotra, Manoj Knoth, Russell L. Epilepsia Open Full‐length Original Research OBJECTIVES: (1) To evaluate risk of hospitalization following initiation of perampanel (pre‐ and post‐analysis) and (2) to compare hospitalization rates following initiation of perampanel vs lacosamide. METHODS: Patients were identified from Symphony Health's Patient Integrated Database if they had a prescription for perampanel (July 1, 2014‐June 30, 2016). Patients 4‐11 years of age with any partial‐onset seizure (POS) or ≥12 years of age with any POS or primary generalized tonic‐clonic seizure (GTCS) (pre‐post); or ≥12 years of age (perampanel vs lacosamide). The first fill of perampanel (“index date”) marked the start of the analysis period. Patients had ≥1 additional fill for perampanel and ≥2 diagnoses for epilepsy or nonfebrile convulsion diagnosis during pre‐index (based on ICD‐9/ICD‐10 codes). Patients were matched using a 1:1 propensity scoring method for the perampanel vs lacosamide analysis. Primary outcome was hospitalization during the one year following medication initiation. RESULTS: Pre‐ and post‐perampanel: N = 1771 (mean age 34 years, 55% female). One‐year all‐cause hospitalization risk ratio was 0.76 (P < .05) and 36.2% with hospitalization during the pre‐period vs 29.5% in the follow‐up. One‐year epilepsy‐related inpatient hospitalization risk ratio was 0.72 (P < .05) and 30.8% with hospitalization during the pre‐period vs 23.9% during follow‐up. In the perampanel and lacosamide cohorts, N = 1717 per cohort after matching, most baseline demographics were balanced. A higher percentage of subjects were prescribed ≥3 anti‐seizure medications for perampanel vs lacosamide (60.5% vs 57.7%, P < .001). The perampanel cohort had a 9.6% reduction in all‐cause hospitalizations vs 5.8% for the lacosamide cohort (P < .05). Epilepsy‐related hospitalizations decreased from the pre‐index rate by 9.9% for perampanel and 8.3% for lacosamide (P < .05). Among those with baseline hospitalizations, perampanel was associated with a 59.9% reduction in all‐cause hospitalizations vs 48.6% for lacosamide (P < .05), and for epilepsy‐related hospitalizations, a reduction of 65.0% vs 58.9%, respectively (P < .05). SIGNIFICANCE: Perampanel was associated with a significant reduction in one‐year hospitalization risk. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-08-13 /pmc/articles/PMC8633480/ /pubmed/34170633 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/epi4.12515 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Epilepsia Open published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International League Against Epilepsy. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Full‐length Original Research
Faught, Edward
Li, Xuan
Choi, Jiyoon
Malhotra, Manoj
Knoth, Russell L.
Real‐world analysis of hospitalizations in patients with epilepsy and treated with perampanel
title Real‐world analysis of hospitalizations in patients with epilepsy and treated with perampanel
title_full Real‐world analysis of hospitalizations in patients with epilepsy and treated with perampanel
title_fullStr Real‐world analysis of hospitalizations in patients with epilepsy and treated with perampanel
title_full_unstemmed Real‐world analysis of hospitalizations in patients with epilepsy and treated with perampanel
title_short Real‐world analysis of hospitalizations in patients with epilepsy and treated with perampanel
title_sort real‐world analysis of hospitalizations in patients with epilepsy and treated with perampanel
topic Full‐length Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8633480/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34170633
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/epi4.12515
work_keys_str_mv AT faughtedward realworldanalysisofhospitalizationsinpatientswithepilepsyandtreatedwithperampanel
AT lixuan realworldanalysisofhospitalizationsinpatientswithepilepsyandtreatedwithperampanel
AT choijiyoon realworldanalysisofhospitalizationsinpatientswithepilepsyandtreatedwithperampanel
AT malhotramanoj realworldanalysisofhospitalizationsinpatientswithepilepsyandtreatedwithperampanel
AT knothrusselll realworldanalysisofhospitalizationsinpatientswithepilepsyandtreatedwithperampanel