OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the influence of prior use of carbamazepine (CBZ) and other antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) with a putatively similar mechanism of action (inhibition of voltage-gated sodium channels; VGSCs) on seizure outcomes and tolerability when converting to eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL), using data pooled from 2 controlled conversion-to-ESL monotherapy trials (studies: 093-045, 093-046). METHODS: Adults with treatment-resistant focal (partial-onset) seizures were randomized 2:1 to ESL 1600 or 1200 mg once daily. The primary efficacy endpoint was study exit (meeting predefined exit criteria related to worsening seizure control) versus an historical control group. Other endpoints included change in seizure frequency, responder rate, and tolerability. Endpoints were analyzed for subgroups of patients who received CBZ (or any VGSC inhibitor [VGSCi]) during baseline versus those who received other AEDs. RESULTS: Of 365 patients in the studies, 332 were evaluable for efficacy. The higher risk of study exit in the subgroups that received CBZ (or any VGSCi) during baseline, versus other AEDs, was not statistically significant (hazard ratios were 1.49 for +CBZ vs -CBZ [P = .10] and 1.27 for +VGSCi vs. -VGSCi [P = .33]). Reductions in seizure frequency and responder rates were lower in patients who converted from CBZ or other VGSCi compared with those who converted from other AEDs. There were no notable differences in overall tolerability between subgroups, but the incidence of some adverse events (eg, dizziness, somnolence, nausea) differed between subgroups and/or between treatment periods. SIGNIFICANCE: Baseline use of CBZ or other major putative VGSC inhibitors did not appear to significantly increase the risk of study exit due to worsening seizure control, or to increase the frequency of side effects when converting to ESL monotherapy. However, bigger improvements in efficacy may be possible in patients converting to ESL monotherapy from an AED regimen that does not include a VGSC inhibitor.

• MeSH
• antikonvulziva aplikace a dávkování   škodlivé účinky   MeSH
• blokátory sodíkových kanálů řízených napětím aplikace a dávkování   škodlivé účinky   MeSH
• dibenzazepiny aplikace a dávkování   škodlivé účinky   MeSH
• dospělí MeSH
• karbamazepin aplikace a dávkování   škodlivé účinky   MeSH
• lidé středního věku MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• mladiství MeSH
• mladý dospělý MeSH
• náhrada léků škodlivé účinky   trendy   MeSH
• nauzea chemicky indukované   diagnóza   MeSH
• refrakterní epilepsie diagnóza   farmakoterapie   MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• výsledek terapie MeSH
• Check Tag
• dospělí MeSH
• lidé středního věku MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• mladiství MeSH
• mladý dospělý MeSH
• mužské pohlaví MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• ženské pohlaví MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• klinické zkoušky, fáze III MeSH
• práce podpořená grantem MeSH
• randomizované kontrolované studie MeSH

BACKGROUND: Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL, Aptiom®) is a once-daily (QD) anticonvulsant, approved as adjunctive treatment of partial-onset seizures (POS). It is extensively converted after oral administration to eslicarbazepine, and is believed to exert its effect through inhibition of voltage-gated sodium channels. The possible role of ESL as monotherapy to treat POS has not yet been established. METHODS: This study was an 18-week, multicenter, randomized double-blind trial of gradual conversion to ESL monotherapy in adults with POS not well controlled by 1-2 antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), using historical data as the control. The study comprised an 8-week baseline period, a 2-week titration period, a 6-week AED conversion period, a 10-week monotherapy period, and either a 1-week taper period or optional entry to an open-label extension study. The primary endpoint compared the Kaplan-Meier (KM)-estimated 112-day exit rate with a threshold value calculated from the historical controls. RESULTS: There were 172 randomized patients; 154 (90%) entered the AED conversion period and 121 (70%) completed the study. The KM-estimated exit rates [confidence interval (CI)] were 15.6% [8.1-28.7%] for ESL 1200 mg, and 12.8% [7.5-21.5%] for ESL 1600 mg. The upper limits of the 95% CI KM-estimates were below the pre-specified threshold for historical control of 65.3%, indicating that ESL was efficacious in reducing seizure-related exits, compared with historical control. During the 18-week double-blind treatment period, median reductions in standardized seizure frequency occurred with ESL 1200 mg (36.1%) and ESL 1600 mg (47.5%). The responder rates (a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency from baseline) during the 18-week double-blind period and the monotherapy period, respectively, were 35.2% and 38.9% for ESL 1200 mg, and 46.0% and 46.0% for ESL 1600 mg. The overall adverse event profile was consistent with the known safety profile of ESL. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that ESL monotherapy (1200 and 1600 mg QD) was efficacious and well tolerated in this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01091662 ; EudraCT No. 2010-018684-42.

• MeSH
• antikonvulziva terapeutické užití   MeSH
• dibenzazepiny terapeutické užití   MeSH
• dospělí MeSH
• dvojitá slepá metoda MeSH
• epilepsie parciální farmakoterapie   MeSH
• Kaplanův-Meierův odhad MeSH
• lidé středního věku MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• mladiství MeSH
• mladý dospělý MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• výsledek terapie MeSH
• záchvaty farmakoterapie   MeSH
• Check Tag
• dospělí MeSH
• lidé středního věku MeSH
• lidé MeSH
• mladiství MeSH
• mladý dospělý MeSH
• mužské pohlaví MeSH
• senioři MeSH
• ženské pohlaví MeSH
• Publikační typ
• časopisecké články MeSH
• klinické zkoušky, fáze III MeSH
• multicentrická studie MeSH
• práce podpořená grantem MeSH
• randomizované kontrolované studie MeSH