Chloe E Hill1, Chun Chieh Lin2, Samuel W Terman2, Subhendu Rath2, Jack M Parent2, Lesli E Skolarus2, James F Burke2. 1. From the Health Services Research Program (C.E.H., C.C.L., S.W.T., L.E.S., J.F.B.), Department of Neurology, University of Michigan; Department of Neurology (S.R., J.M.P.), University of Michigan; Veterans Affairs Healthcare System (J.M.P., J.F.B.); and Michigan Neuroscience Institute (J.M.P.), Ann Arbor. chloehi@med.umich.edu. 2. From the Health Services Research Program (C.E.H., C.C.L., S.W.T., L.E.S., J.F.B.), Department of Neurology, University of Michigan; Department of Neurology (S.R., J.M.P.), University of Michigan; Veterans Affairs Healthcare System (J.M.P., J.F.B.); and Michigan Neuroscience Institute (J.M.P.), Ann Arbor.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of definitions of drug-resistant epilepsy applied to administrative claims data. METHODS: We randomly sampled 450 patients from a tertiary health system with ≥1 epilepsy/convulsion encounter, ≥2 distinct antiseizure medications (ASMs) from 2014 to 2020, and ≥2 years of electronic medical records (EMR) data. We established a drug-resistant epilepsy diagnosis at a specific visit by reviewing EMR data and using a rubric based on the 2010 International League Against Epilepsy definition. We performed logistic regressions to assess clinically relevant predictors of drug-resistant epilepsy and to inform claims-based definitions. RESULTS: Of 450 patients reviewed, 150 were excluded for insufficient EMR data. Of the 300 patients included, 98 (33%) met criteria for current drug-resistant epilepsy. The strongest predictors of current drug-resistant epilepsy were drug-resistant epilepsy diagnosis code (odds ratio [OR] 16.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 8.8-32.2), ≥2 ASMs in the prior 2 years (OR 13.0, 95% CI 5.1-33.3), ≥3 nongabapentinoid ASMs (OR 10.3, 95% CI 5.4-19.6), neurosurgery visit (OR 45.2, 95% CI 5.9-344.3), and epilepsy surgery (OR 30.7, 95% CI 7.1-133.3). We created claims-based drug-resistant epilepsy definitions (1) to maximize overall predictiveness (drug-resistant epilepsy diagnosis; sensitivity 0.86, specificity 0.74, area under the receiver operating characteristics curve [AUROC] 0.80), (2) to maximize sensitivity (drug-resistant epilepsy diagnosis or ≥3 ASMs; sensitivity 0.98, specificity 0.47, AUROC 0.72), and (3) to maximize specificity (drug-resistant epilepsy diagnosis and ≥3 nongabapentinoid ASMs; sensitivity 0.42, specificity 0.98, AUROC 0.70). DISCUSSION: Our findings provide validation for several claims-based definitions of drug-resistant epilepsy that can be applied to a variety of research questions.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of definitions of drug-resistant epilepsy applied to administrative claims data. METHODS: We randomly sampled 450 patients from a tertiary health system with ≥1 epilepsy/convulsion encounter, ≥2 distinct antiseizure medications (ASMs) from 2014 to 2020, and ≥2 years of electronic medical records (EMR) data. We established a drug-resistant epilepsy diagnosis at a specific visit by reviewing EMR data and using a rubric based on the 2010 International League Against Epilepsy definition. We performed logistic regressions to assess clinically relevant predictors of drug-resistant epilepsy and to inform claims-based definitions. RESULTS: Of 450 patients reviewed, 150 were excluded for insufficient EMR data. Of the 300 patients included, 98 (33%) met criteria for current drug-resistant epilepsy. The strongest predictors of current drug-resistant epilepsy were drug-resistant epilepsy diagnosis code (odds ratio [OR] 16.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 8.8-32.2), ≥2 ASMs in the prior 2 years (OR 13.0, 95% CI 5.1-33.3), ≥3 nongabapentinoid ASMs (OR 10.3, 95% CI 5.4-19.6), neurosurgery visit (OR 45.2, 95% CI 5.9-344.3), and epilepsy surgery (OR 30.7, 95% CI 7.1-133.3). We created claims-based drug-resistant epilepsy definitions (1) to maximize overall predictiveness (drug-resistant epilepsy diagnosis; sensitivity 0.86, specificity 0.74, area under the receiver operating characteristics curve [AUROC] 0.80), (2) to maximize sensitivity (drug-resistant epilepsy diagnosis or ≥3 ASMs; sensitivity 0.98, specificity 0.47, AUROC 0.72), and (3) to maximize specificity (drug-resistant epilepsy diagnosis and ≥3 nongabapentinoid ASMs; sensitivity 0.42, specificity 0.98, AUROC 0.70). DISCUSSION: Our findings provide validation for several claims-based definitions of drug-resistant epilepsy that can be applied to a variety of research questions.
Authors: Lidia M V R Moura; Jason R Smith; Deborah Blacker; Christine Vogeli; Lee H Schwamm; Andrew J Cole; Sonia Hernandez-Diaz; John Hsu Journal: Med Care Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Patrick Kwan; Alexis Arzimanoglou; Anne T Berg; Martin J Brodie; W Allen Hauser; Gary Mathern; Solomon L Moshé; Emilio Perucca; Samuel Wiebe; Jacqueline French Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2009-11-03 Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: Jorge G Burneo; Salimah Z Shariff; Kuan Liu; Sean Leonard; Gustavo Saposnik; Amit X Garg Journal: Neurology Date: 2015-12-07 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Samuel Waller Terman; Wesley T Kerr; Carole E Aubert; Chloe E Hill; Zachary A Marcum; James F Burke Journal: Neurology Date: 2021-12-10 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Samuel Waller Terman; Chun C Lin; Wesley T Kerr; Lindsey B DeLott; Brian C Callaghan; James F Burke Journal: Neurology Date: 2022-06-15 Impact factor: 11.800
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