4.5 Article

Gabapentin versus lamotrigine monotherapy: A double-blind comparison in newly diagnosed epilepsy

期刊

EPILEPSIA
卷 43, 期 9, 页码 993-1000

出版社

BLACKWELL PUBLISHING INC
DOI: 10.1046/j.1528-1157.2002.45401.x

关键词

epilepsy; gabapentin; lamotrigine; monotherapy; noninferiority study

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: This randomised, double-blind study compared the newer antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) gabapentin (GBP) and lamotrigine (LTG) as monotherapy in newly diagnosed epilepsy. Methods: Patients with partial seizures with and/or without secondary generalization or primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures were randomized to either GBP or LTG. During 2- and 6-week titration periods, respectively, GBP dosage reached 1,800 mg/day, and LTG, 150 mg/day. In the subsequent 24-week maintenance phase, the dose could be adjusted based on seizure control or adverse events between 1,200 and 3,600 mg/day for GBP and 100 and 300 mg/day for LTG. The primary end point was time to exit, a composite of efficacy and tolerability. Evaluable patients were used for the primary efficacy analysis, whereas tolerability was examined on an intent-to-treat basis, Results: A total of 309 patients was randomized, and 291 (148 GBP, 143 LTG) were included in the evaluable population. Nineteen patients in each group had an exit event, The median time to exit was 69 days for GBP and 48 days for LTG. The hazard ratio was estimated as 1.043 (90% confidence intervals, 0.602-1.809). Overall, 106 (71.6% of the evaluable population) GBP-treated and 96 (67.1%) LTG-treated patients completed the study. Of those, 80 (75.5%) patients taking GBP and 73 (76.0%) taking LTG remained seizure free during the final 12 weeks of treatment, Only 14 (8.9%) GBP-treated patients and 15 (9.9%) LTG-treated patients withdrew because of study drug-related adverse events. Conclusions: GBP and LTG monotherapy were similarly effective and well tolerated in patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据