4.2 Article

Long-term safety and efficacy of eslicarbazepine acetate in patients with focal seizures: Results of the 1-year ESLIBASE retrospective study

期刊

EPILEPSY RESEARCH
卷 108, 期 7, 页码 1243-1252

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2014.04.014

关键词

Antiepileptic drug; Real-life setting; ESLIBASE; Eslicarbazepine acetate; Focal seizures

资金

  1. Bial

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) is a new antiepileptic drug (AED) licensed as adjunctive therapy in adults with partial-onset or focal seizures. Objective: To evaluate in a clinical practice setting the long-term efficacy and safety of ESL in patients with focal seizures. Methods: ESLIBASE was a retrospective study that included all patients with focal seizures who started ESL between January 2010 and July 2012 at 12 hospitals. ESL was prescribed individually according to real-life practice. Efficacy and safety were evaluated over 1 year. Switching from carbamazepine (CBZ) and oxcarbazepine (OXC) was assessed. Results: Three hundred and twenty-seven patients were included; 78% of patients were taking >= 2 other AEDs at baseline. Most (87%) began ESL because of poor seizure control and13% because of adverse events (AEs) with CBZ or OXC. After 1 year, 237 patients (72.4%) remained on ESL. At 3, 6 and 12 months, the responder rate was 46.3%, 57.9%, and 52.5%, and 21.0%, 28.0%, and 25.3% of patients were seizure free. The responder rate significantly increased when ESL was combined with a non-sodium channel-targeting drug (non-SC drug) (66.7%) versus an SC drug (47.7%; p < 0.001). At 12 months, 40.7% of patients had >= 1 AE; AEs led to treatment discontinuation in 16.2%. Dizziness, nausea, and somnolence were the most common AEs. The tolerability profile improved in >50% of the patients who switched from CBZ or OXC to ESL because of AEs. Conclusions: ESL was well tolerated and effective in a real-world setting over 1 year. Side-effect profile improved when OXC and CBZ recipients were switched to ESL. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.2
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