5 research outputs found

    Seizure control in patients with epilepsy: the physician vs. medication factors

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Little is known about the relationship between types of healthcare providers and outcomes in patients with epilepsy. This study compares the relative effects of provider type (epileptologist vs. other neurologist) and pharmacologic treatment (newer vs. older antiepileptic drugs) on seizure control in patients with epilepsy.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a retrospective study of patients with medication-resistant epilepsy. Consecutive charts of 200 patients were abstracted using a standard case report form. For each patient, data included seizure frequency and medication use prior to, and while being treated by an epileptologist. Changes in seizure frequency were modeled using a generalized linear model.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>After transferring care from a general neurologist to specialized epilepsy center, patients experienced fewer seizures (p < 0.001) and were more frequently seizure-free (p < 0.001). The improved seizure control was not related to treatment with newer vs. older antiepileptic drugs (p = 0.305).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our findings suggest an association between subspecialty epilepsy care and improved seizure control in patients with medication-resistant epilepsy. Further research should prospectively determine whether patients with medication-resistant epilepsy would benefit from being routinely referred to an epilepsy specialist.</p

    Implications for sequencing of biologic therapy and choice of second anti-TNF in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: Results from the IMmunogenicity to Second Anti-TNF therapy (IMSAT) therapeutic drug monitoring study.

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Anti-drug antibodies are associated with treatment failure to anti-TNF agents in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). AIM: To assess whether immunogenicity to a patient's first anti-TNF agent would be associated with immunogenicity to their second, irrespective of drug sequence METHODS: We conducted a UK-wide, multicentre, retrospective cohort study to report rates of immunogenicity and treatment failure of second anti-TNF therapies in 1058 patients with IBD who underwent therapeutic drug monitoring for both infliximab and adalimumab. The primary outcome was immunogenicity to the second anti-TNF drug, defined at any timepoint as an anti-TNF antibody concentration ≥9 AU/ml for infliximab and ≥6 AU/ml for adalimumab. RESULTS: In patients treated with infliximab and then adalimumab, those who developed antibodies to infliximab were more likely to develop antibodies to adalimumab, than patients who did not develop antibodies to infliximab (OR 1.99, 95%CI 1.27-3.20, p = 0.002). Similarly, in patients treated with adalimumab and then infliximab, immunogenicity to adalimumab was associated with subsequent immunogenicity to infliximab (OR 2.63, 95%CI 1.46-4.80, p < 0.001). For each 10-fold increase in anti-infliximab and anti-adalimumab antibody concentration, the odds of subsequently developing antibodies to adalimumab and infliximab increased by 1.73 (95% CI 1.38-2.17, p < 0.001) and 1.99 (95%CI 1.34-2.99, p < 0.001), respectively. Patients who developed immunogenicity with undetectable drug levels to infliximab were more likely to develop immunogenicity with undetectable drug levels to adalimumab (OR 2.37, 95% CI 1.39-4.19, p < 0.001). Commencing an immunomodulator at the time of switching to the second anti-TNF was associated with improved drug persistence in patients with immunogenic, but not pharmacodynamic failure. CONCLUSION: Irrespective of drug sequence, immunogenicity to the first anti-TNF agent was associated with immunogenicity to the second anti-TNF, which was mitigated by the introduction of an immunomodulator in patients with immunogenic, but not pharmacodynamic treatment failure

    Care of the Stroke Patient: Routine Management to Lifesaving Treatment Options

    No full text
    The management of the acute ischemic stroke patient spans the time course from the emergency evaluation and treatment period through to the eventual discharge planning phase of stroke care. In this article we evaluate the literature and describe what have become standard treatments in the care of the stroke patient. We will review the literature that supports the use of a dedicated stroke unit for routine stroke care which has demonstrated reduced rates of morbidity and mortality. Also reviewed is the use of glycemic control in the initial setting along with data supporting the use of prophylactic treatments options in order to aide in the prevention of life threatening medical complications. In addition, lifesaving treatments will be discussed in light of new literature demonstrating reduced mortality in large hemispheric stroke patients undergoing surgical decompressive surgery. Both medical and surgical treatment options are discussed and compared

    Treatment adaptations and outcomes of patients experiencing inflammatory bowel disease flares during the early COVID-19 pandemic: the PREPARE-IBD multicentre cohort study

    No full text

    Strategies to Improve Recovery in Acute Ischemic Stroke Patients: Iberoamerican Stroke Group Consensus

    No full text
    corecore