Edward Faught1, Jerzy P Szaflarski2, Joshua Richman3, Ellen Funkhouser4, Roy C Martin2, Kendra Piper5, Chen Dai4, Lucia Juarez4, Maria Pisu4. 1. Department of Neurology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA. 2. Department of Neurology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. 3. Department of Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. 4. Division of Preventive Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. 5. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency of older Americans with epilepsy receiving concomitant prescriptions for antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and non-epilepsy drugs (NEDs) which could result in significant pharmacokinetic (PK) interaction, and to assess the contributions of racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, and demographic factors. METHODS: Retrospective analyses of 2008-2010 Medicare claims for a 5% random sample of beneficiaries ≥67 years old in 2009 augmented for minority representation. Prevalent cases had ≥1 ICD-9 345.x or ≥2 ICD-9 780.3x, and ≥1 AED. Among them, incident cases had no seizure/epilepsy claim codes nor AEDs in preceding 365 days. Drug claims for AEDs, and for the 50 most common NEDs within +/- 60 days of the index epilepsy date were tabulated. Interacting pairs of AEDs/NEDs were identified by literature review. Logistic regression models were used to examine factors affecting the likelihood of interaction risk. RESULTS: Interacting drug pairs affecting NED efficacy were found in 24.5% of incident, 39% of prevalent cases. Combinations affecting AED efficacy were found in 20.4% of incident, 29.3% of prevalent cases. Factors predicting higher interaction risk included having ≥ 1 comorbidity, being eligible for Part D low Income Subsidy, and not living in the northeastern US. Protective factors were Asian race/ethnicity, and treatment by a neurologist. SIGNIFICANCE: A substantial portion of older epilepsy patients received NED-AED combinations that could cause important PK interactions. The lower frequency among incident vs. prevalent cases may reflect changes in prescribing practices. Avoidance of interacting AEDs is feasible for most persons because of the availability of newer drugs. Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency of older Americans with epilepsy receiving concomitant prescriptions for antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and non-epilepsy drugs (NEDs) which could result in significant pharmacokinetic (PK) interaction, and to assess the contributions of racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, and demographic factors. METHODS: Retrospective analyses of 2008-2010 Medicare claims for a 5% random sample of beneficiaries ≥67 years old in 2009 augmented for minority representation. Prevalent cases had ≥1 ICD-9 345.x or ≥2 ICD-9 780.3x, and ≥1 AED. Among them, incident cases had no seizure/epilepsy claim codes nor AEDs in preceding 365 days. Drug claims for AEDs, and for the 50 most common NEDs within +/- 60 days of the index epilepsy date were tabulated. Interacting pairs of AEDs/NEDs were identified by literature review. Logistic regression models were used to examine factors affecting the likelihood of interaction risk. RESULTS: Interacting drug pairs affecting NED efficacy were found in 24.5% of incident, 39% of prevalent cases. Combinations affecting AED efficacy were found in 20.4% of incident, 29.3% of prevalent cases. Factors predicting higher interaction risk included having ≥ 1 comorbidity, being eligible for Part D low Income Subsidy, and not living in the northeastern US. Protective factors were Asian race/ethnicity, and treatment by a neurologist. SIGNIFICANCE: A substantial portion of older epilepsypatients received NED-AED combinations that could cause important PK interactions. The lower frequency among incident vs. prevalent cases may reflect changes in prescribing practices. Avoidance of interacting AEDs is feasible for most persons because of the availability of newer drugs. Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Authors: M J V Pugh; D R Berlowitz; G Montouris; B Bokhour; J A Cramer; V Bohm; M Bollinger; S Helmers; A Ettinger; K J Meador; N Fountain; J Boggs; W O Tatum; J Knoefel; C Harden; R H Mattson; L Kazis Journal: Neurology Date: 2007-10-10 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: E Wayne Holden; Elizabeth Grossman; Hoang Thanh Nguyen; Margaret J Gunter; Becky Grebosky; Ann Von Worley; Leila Nelson; Scott Robinson; David J Thurman Journal: Dis Manag Date: 2005-02
Authors: Magdalena Szaflarski; Jerzy P Szaflarski; Michael D Privitera; David M Ficker; Ronnie D Horner Journal: Epilepsy Behav Date: 2006-07-12 Impact factor: 2.937
Authors: Martin J Brodie; Scott Mintzer; Alison M Pack; Barry E Gidal; Charles J Vecht; Dieter Schmidt Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2012-09-27 Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: Roy C Martin; Edward Faught; Jerzy P Szaflarski; Joshua Richman; Ellen Funkhouser; Kendra Piper; Lucia Juarez; Chen Dai; Maria Pisu Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2017-02-07 Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: Maria Pisu; Joshua Richman; Kendra Piper; Roy Martin; Ellen Funkhouser; Chen Dai; Lucia Juarez; Jerzy P Szaflarski; Edward Faught Journal: Med Care Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Mary Jo V Pugh; Amy K Rosen; Maria Montez-Rath; Megan E Amuan; Benjamin G Fincke; Muriel Burk; Arlene Bierman; Francesca Cunningham; Eric M Mortensen; Dan R Berlowitz Journal: Med Care Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Maria Pisu; Joshua Richman; Jerzy P Szaflarski; Ellen Funkhouser; Chen Dai; Lucia Juarez; Edward Faught; Roy C Martin Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2019-06-06 Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: Samuel W Terman; Joshua D Niznik; Geertruida Slinger; Willem M Otte; Kees P J Braun; Carole E Aubert; Wesley T Kerr; Cynthia M Boyd; James F Burke Journal: BMC Neurol Date: 2022-09-01 Impact factor: 2.903