IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0131566.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative Long-Term Effectiveness of a Monotherapy with Five Antiepileptic Drugs for Focal Epilepsy in Adult Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study

Author

Listed:
  • Qing-Yi Zeng
  • Tian-Tian Fan
  • Pan Zhu
  • Ru-Qian He
  • Yi-Xin Bao
  • Rong-Yuan Zheng
  • Hui-Qin Xu

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate and compare long-term effectiveness of five antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) for monotherapy of adult patients with focal epilepsy in routine clinical practice. Methods: Adult patients with focal epilepsy, who were prescribed with carbamazepine (CBZ), valproate (VPA), lamotrigine (LTG), topiramate (TPM), or oxcarbazepine (OXC) as monotherapy, during the period from January 2004 to June 2012 registered in Wenzhou Epilepsy Follow Up Registry Database (WEFURD), were included in the study. Prospective long-term follow-up was conducted until June 2013. The endpoints were time to treatment failure, time to seizure remission, and time to first seizure. Results: This study included 654 patients: CBZ (n=125), VPA (n=151), LTG (n=135), TPM (n=76), and OXC (n=167). The retention rates of CBZ, VPA, LTG, TPM, and OXC at the third year were 36.1%, 32.4%, 57.6%, 37.9%, and 41.8%, respectively. For time to treatment failure, LTG was significantly better than CBZ and VPA (LTG vs. CBZ, hazard ratio, [HR] 0.80 [95% confidence interval: 0.67-0.96], LTG vs. VPA, 0.53 [0.37-0.74]); TPM was worse than LTG (TPM vs. LTG, 1.77 [1.15-2.74]), and OXC was better than VPA (0.86 [0.78-0.96]). After initial target doses, the seizure remission rates of CBZ, VPA, LTG, TPM, and OXC were 63.0%, 77.0%, 83.6%, 67.9%, and 75.3%, respectively. LTG was significantly better than CBZ (1.44 [1.15-1.82]) and OXC (LTG vs. OXC, 0.76 [0.63-0.93]); OXC was less effective than LTG in preventing the first seizure (1.20 [1.02-1.40]). Conclusion: LTG was the best, OXC was better than VPA only, while VPA was the worst. The others were equivalent for comparisons between five AEDs regarding the long-term treatment outcomes of monotherapy for adult patients with focal epilepsy in a clinical practice. For selecting AEDs for these patients among the first-line drugs, LTG is an appropriate first choice; others are reservation in the first-line but VPA is not.

Suggested Citation

  • Qing-Yi Zeng & Tian-Tian Fan & Pan Zhu & Ru-Qian He & Yi-Xin Bao & Rong-Yuan Zheng & Hui-Qin Xu, 2015. "Comparative Long-Term Effectiveness of a Monotherapy with Five Antiepileptic Drugs for Focal Epilepsy in Adult Patients: A Prospective Cohort Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(7), pages 1-16, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0131566
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0131566
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0131566
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0131566&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0131566?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0131566. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.