Management and monitoring of patients treated with zonisamide: the OZONE study.

International audienceTo characterise patients treated with zonisamide in everyday practice and describe the effectiveness and tolerability of treatment. This was an observational, longitudinal, naturalistic study, conducted by neurologists in France. Patients who had started zonisamide treatment at least three months prior to inclusion were eligible. Data were collected at routine consultations at inclusion (Visit 1) and three to six months later (Visit 2). At Visit 1, investigators documented epilepsy-related variables based on patient records before initiation of zonisamide and at inclusion. At Visit 2, the investigators re-evaluated seizure activity and rated effectiveness. Adverse events were also documented. A total of 428 patients were included in the study based on evaluation by 132 neurologists. Zonisamide was initiated at a daily dose of 50 mg and 25 mg in 61% and 31.8% of patients, respectively. The median maintenance dose was 300 mg/day. Prior to initiation of zonisamide, the mean seizure frequency was 16.0 seizures/month. This was reduced to 8.7 seizures/month at Visit 1 and to 7.1 seizures/month at Visit 2. The response rate and proportion of seizure-free patients was 61.9 and 31.1% at Visit 1 and 65.9 and 25.6% at Visit 2, respectively. The frequency of seizures at Visit 2 decreased significantly (p60% for all analysed subgroups. The proportion of seizure-free patients was significantly higher in patients receiving bitherapy, compared to the others (p=0.007). The most frequently reported adverse event was somnolence (5.1%); three serious adverse events were reported. In everyday practice, zonisamide is principally used in association with other antiepileptic drugs for the treatment of focal epilepsy in adults. It is effective in improving seizure control and quality of life, and is generally well-tolerated

Severe migraine and its control: A proposal for definitions and consequences for care

International audienceCurrently many patients with severe migraine do not receive appropriate treatment and are never referred to specialist headache centres. On the other hand, specialist headache centres are frequently attended by patients whose migraines could be managed adequately in the community. One reason for this may be the absence of standardised definitions of migraine severity and control and of a treatment algorithm for orientating difficult-to-treat patients to specialist headache centres. Based on a review of the relevant literature and consensus meetings, proposals have been made for these items. We propose that migraine should be considered severe if headache frequency is at least eight migraine days per month or, if headaches are less frequent, the HIT-6 score is ≥60 or ≥50% of headaches require complete interruption of activity. The proposed definition of migraine control is defined on the basis of appropriate response to acute headache therapy and to preventative therapy. A treatment algorithm is proposed to assess migraine control regularly and to adapt therapy accordingly. These proposals may contribute to developing and testing strategies for management of severe disease with appropriate and effective preventive treatment strategies. With the anticipated introduction of new possibilities for migraine prevention in the near future, the time is ripe for a holistic approach to migraine management

Migraine burden and costs in France: a nationwide claims database analysis of triptan users

<p><b>Objectives:</b> To estimate the burden of migraine in the population of French patients identified as specific migraine acute treatment users compared to a control group.</p> <p><b>Methods:</b> A cross-sectional retrospective analysis was performed on the Echantillon Généraliste des Bénéficiaires claims database, a 1/97 random sample of the French public insurance database. A representative sample of all adults with at least one delivery of triptans, ergot derivatives or acetylsalicylic acid/metoclopramide (all drugs with a specific label in migraine acute treatment – SMAT) in 2014 was selected with a control group matched on age, gender and geographic region. Among triptan users, a sub-group of over-users was defined according to their level of triptan uptake expressed in defined daily doses (DDD – a standard daily dose of treatment of acute migraine) per month over 3 months and more, was also compared with controls. The cost analysis was performed in a societal perspective for direct costs. Sick leave indirect costs were estimated using the human capital approach.</p> <p><b>Results:</b> In total 8639 SMAT users (mean age: 44.6 years; 78.7% women) were selected representing a crude prevalence rate of 1.7%. The annual per capita total healthcare expenditures were higher by €280 in this group compared to controls (€2463 vs. €2183). Triptans contributed 47.8% to this extra cost. They used significantly (<i>p</i> < .0001) more frequently than controls antidepressants (20.8% vs. 11.0%), anxiolytics (29.4% vs. 18.8%) and analgesics (53.8% vs. 35.8%). The per capita annual productivity loss associated with sick leave was higher by €295 (€1712 vs. €1417). Among triptan users, there were 2.9% over-users. This last group was characterized by substantially higher per capita annual extra direct (+ €1805) and indirect costs (productivity loss +€706) compared to controls.</p> <p><b>Conclusions:</b> Due to its high prevalence, migraine costs generate a significant societal burden. The group of over-users concentrates high per capita direct and indirect costs.</p

Long-Term Effectiveness, Safety and Tolerability of Fingolimod in Patients with Multiple Sclerosis in Real-World Treatment Settings in France: The VIRGILE Study

Online ahead of printInternational audienceIntroduction: It is important to confirm the effectiveness and tolerability of disease-modifying treatments for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) in real-world treatment settings. This prospective observational cohort study (VIRGILE) was performed at the request of the French health authorities. The primary objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of fingolimod 0.5 mg in reducing the annualised relapse rate (ARR) in patients with RRMS.Methods: Participating neurologists enrolled all adult patients with RRMS starting fingolimod treatment between 2014 and 2016, who were followed for 3 years. Follow-up consultations took place at the investigator's discretion. The primary outcome measure was the change in ARR at month 24 after fingolimod initiation. Relapses and adverse events were documented at each consultation; disability assessment (EDSS) and magnetic resonance imagery were performed at the investigator's discretion.Results: Of 1055 eligible patients, 633 patients were assessable at month 36; 405 (64.0%) were treated continuously with fingolimod for 3 years. The ARR decreased from 0.92 ± 0.92 at inclusion to 0.31 ± 0.51 at month 24, a significant reduction of 0.58 [95% CI - 0.51 to - 0.65] relapses/year (p < 0.001). Since starting fingolimod, 461 patients (60.9%) remained relapse-free at month 24 and 366 patients (55.5%) at month 36. In multivariate analysis, no previous disease-modifying treatment, number of relapses in the previous year and lower EDSS score at inclusion were associated with a greater on-treatment reduction in ARR. The mean EDSS score remained stable over the course of the study. Sixty-one out of 289 (21.1%) patients presented new radiological signs of disease activity. Treatment-related serious adverse events were lymphopenia (N = 21), bradycardia (N = 19), elevated transaminases (N = 9) and macular oedema (N = 9).Conclusions: The effectiveness and tolerability of fingolimod in everyday clinical practice are consistent with findings of previous phase III studies. Our study highlights the utility of fingolimod for the long-term management of patients with multiple sclerosis