Xuerong Wen1, Kimford J Meador2, Abraham Hartzema2. 1. From the Department of Medicine (X.W.), and Department of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, College of Pharmacy (A.H.), University of Florida, Gainesville; and Department of Neurology & Neurological Sciences (K.J.M.), Stanford University, CA. xuerong.wen@medicine.ufl.edu. 2. From the Department of Medicine (X.W.), and Department of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, College of Pharmacy (A.H.), University of Florida, Gainesville; and Department of Neurology & Neurological Sciences (K.J.M.), Stanford University, CA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The study aims were to investigate secular trends in antiepileptic drug (AED) use in women during pregnancy, and to compare the use of first- and second-generation AEDs. METHODS: Study participants consisted of female Florida Medicaid beneficiaries, older than 15 years, and pregnant within the time period 1999 to 2009. Fifteen AEDs were categorized into first and second generation of AEDs. Continuous use of AEDs was defined as at least 2 consecutive AED prescriptions totaling more than a 30-day supply. Polytherapy was defined as 2 or more AEDs continuously used for at least 30 overlapping days. Annual prevalence was estimated and compared. RESULTS: We included 2,099 pregnant women who were enrolled in Florida Medicaid from 1999 to 2009 and exposed to AEDs during pregnancy. Although there were fluctuations, overall AED use in the study cohort did not increase from 2000 to 2009 (β ± standard error [SE]: -0.07 ± 0.06, p = 0.31). The use of first-generation AEDs decreased (β ± SE: -6.21 ± 0.47, p < 0.0001), whereas the use of second-generation AEDs increased (β ± SE: 6.27 ± 0.52, p < 0.0001) from 2000 to 2009. AED use in polytherapy did not change through the study period. Valproate use reduced from 23% to 8% in the study population (β ± SE: -1.61 ± 0.36, p = 0.0019), but this decrease was only for women receiving an AED for epilepsy and was not present for other indications. CONCLUSION: The second-generation AEDs are replacing first-generation AEDs in both monotherapy and polytherapy. Valproate use has declined for epilepsy but not other indications. Additional changes in AED use are expected in future years.
OBJECTIVE: The study aims were to investigate secular trends in antiepileptic drug (AED) use in women during pregnancy, and to compare the use of first- and second-generation AEDs. METHODS: Study participants consisted of female Florida Medicaid beneficiaries, older than 15 years, and pregnant within the time period 1999 to 2009. Fifteen AEDs were categorized into first and second generation of AEDs. Continuous use of AEDs was defined as at least 2 consecutive AED prescriptions totaling more than a 30-day supply. Polytherapy was defined as 2 or more AEDs continuously used for at least 30 overlapping days. Annual prevalence was estimated and compared. RESULTS: We included 2,099 pregnant women who were enrolled in Florida Medicaid from 1999 to 2009 and exposed to AEDs during pregnancy. Although there were fluctuations, overall AED use in the study cohort did not increase from 2000 to 2009 (β ± standard error [SE]: -0.07 ± 0.06, p = 0.31). The use of first-generation AEDs decreased (β ± SE: -6.21 ± 0.47, p < 0.0001), whereas the use of second-generation AEDs increased (β ± SE: 6.27 ± 0.52, p < 0.0001) from 2000 to 2009. AED use in polytherapy did not change through the study period. Valproate use reduced from 23% to 8% in the study population (β ± SE: -1.61 ± 0.36, p = 0.0019), but this decrease was only for women receiving an AED for epilepsy and was not present for other indications. CONCLUSION: The second-generation AEDs are replacing first-generation AEDs in both monotherapy and polytherapy. Valproate use has declined for epilepsy but not other indications. Additional changes in AED use are expected in future years.
Authors: William V Bobo; Robert L Davis; Sengwee Toh; De-Kun Li; Susan E Andrade; T Craig Cheetham; Pamala Pawloski; Sascha Dublin; Simone Pinheiro; Tarek Hammad; Pamela E Scott; Richard A Epstein; Patrick G Arbogast; James A Morrow; Judith A Dudley; Jean M Lawrence; Lyndsay A Avalos; William O Cooper Journal: Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol Date: 2012-11 Impact factor: 3.980
Authors: Kimford J Meador; Gus A Baker; Nancy Browning; Morris J Cohen; Rebecca L Bromley; Jill Clayton-Smith; Laura A Kalayjian; Andres Kanner; Joyce D Liporace; Page B Pennell; Michael Privitera; David W Loring Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2013-01-23 Impact factor: 44.182
Authors: Susan E Andrade; Jerry H Gurwitz; Robert L Davis; K Arnold Chan; Jonathan A Finkelstein; Kris Fortman; Heather McPhillips; Marsha A Raebel; Douglas Roblin; David H Smith; Marianne Ulcickas Yood; Abraham N Morse; Richard Platt Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: S Kaneko; K Otani; Y Fukushima; Y Ogawa; Y Nomura; T Ono; Y Nakane; T Teranishi; M Goto Journal: Epilepsia Date: 1988 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: Ellen Mawhinney; John Craig; Jim Morrow; Aline Russell; W Henry Smithson; Linda Parsons; Patrick J Morrison; Brenda Liggan; Beth Irwin; Norman Delanty; Stephen J Hunt Journal: Neurology Date: 2013-01-09 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Dina Battino; Torbjörn Tomson; Erminio Bonizzoni; John Craig; Dick Lindhout; Anne Sabers; Emilio Perucca; Frank Vajda Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2013-07-12 Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: Irma Convertino; Alice Capogrosso Sansone; Alessandra Marino; Maria T Galiulo; Stefania Mantarro; Luca Antonioli; Matteo Fornai; Corrado Blandizzi; Marco Tuccori Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 5.606
Authors: Kimford J Meador; Page B Pennell; Ryan C May; Elizabeth Gerard; Laura Kalayjian; Naymee Velez-Ruiz; Patricia Penovich; Jennifer Cavitt; Jaqueline French; Sean Hwang; Alison M Pack; Maria Sam; Eugene Moore; Dominic M Ippolito Journal: Epilepsy Behav Date: 2018-05-03 Impact factor: 2.937