TY - JOUR
T1 - Response to sequential treatment with prednisolone and vigabatrin in infantile spasms
AU - Dzau, Winston
AU - Cheng, Sally
AU - Snell, Penny
AU - Fahey, Michael
AU - Scheffer, Ingrid E.
AU - Harvey, Anthony Simon
AU - Howell, Katherine B.
N1 - Funding Information:
Conflict of interest: Doctor Howell has received support from RogCon Biosciences, Inc. and Praxis Precision Medicines, and has consulted for Praxis Precision Medicines. Professor Scheffer serves/has served on the editorial boards of the Annals of Neurology, Neurology and Epileptic Disorders; may accrue future revenue on pending patent WO61/010176 (filed: 2008): Therapeutic Compound; has a patent for testing held by Bionomics Inc. and licensed to various diagnostic companies; has a patent molecular diagnostic/theranostic target for benign familial infantile epilepsy (BFIE) (PRRT2) 2011904493 and 2012900190 and PCT/AU2012/001321 (TECH ID:2012‐009) with royalties paid. She has served on scientific advisory boards for UCB, Eisai, GlaxoSmithKline, BioMarin, Nutricia, Rogcon, Chiesi, Encoded Therapeutics, Xenon Pharmaceuticals and Knopp Biosciences; has received speaker honoraria from GlaxoSmithKline, UCB, BioMarin, Biocodex and Eisai; has received funding for travel from UCB, Biocodex, GlaxoSmithKline, Biomarin and Eisai; has served as an investigator for Zogenix, Zynerba, Ultragenyx, GW Pharma, UCB, Eisai, Anavex Life Sciences, Ovid Therapeutics, Epigenyx, Encoded Therapeutics and Marinus; and has consulted for Zynerba Pharmaceuticals, Atheneum Partners, Ovid Therapeutics, Care Beyond Diagnosis, Epilepsy Consortium and UCB. She receives/has received research support from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, the Australian Medical Research Future Fund, Health Research Council of New Zealand, CURE, Australian Epilepsy Research Fund and NIH/NINDS. Dr Fahey has served on scientific advisory boards for Actelion and has consulted for Fenix Consulting and Signant Health; has served as an investigator for UCB, Actelion and Marinus. He has received research support from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia, Medical Research Future Fund, NIH/NINDS, CP Alliance, Inner Wheel, The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Perpetual Trustees and the Fulbright Foundation. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest. SCN1A
Funding Information:
The authors acknowledge the Victorian Severe Epilepsy of Infancy Study Group, patients and their families for their contributions to this research. This study did not receive specific funding. Dr Howell was supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Early Career Fellowship, an NHMRC Project Grant and a Melbourne Children's Clinician Scientist Fellowship. Prof Scheffer is supported by an NHMRC Program Grant, Senior Practitioner and Senior Investigator Fellowship. The MCRI is supported by the Victorian Government's Operational Infrastructure Support Program. Open access publishing facilitated by The University of Melbourne, as part of the Wiley ‐ The University of Melbourne agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 The Authors. Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Paediatrics and Child Health Division (The Royal Australasian College of Physicians).
PY - 2022/12
Y1 - 2022/12
N2 - Aim: To report response to first treatment in infants with infantile spasms (IS), including incremental benefit of prednisolone 60 mg/day and vigabatrin following prednisolone 40 mg/day failure in infants commenced on the United Kingdom Infantile Spasms Study (UKISS) treatment sequence. Methods: In this retrospective analysis, we compared effectiveness of prednisolone, vigabatrin and nonstandard treatments as first treatment for IS. In infants who commenced the UKISS treatment sequence, we evaluated response to each step. Primary outcome was spasm cessation after 42 days. Secondary outcomes were severe side effects and spasm relapse after 42 days. Results: Treatment response data were available for 151 infants. First treatment was prednisolone in 99 infants, vigabatrin in 18 and nonstandard treatment in 34. The rate of spasm cessation with first treatment was significantly higher with prednisolone (62/99, 63%) than vigabatrin (5/18, 28%, P = 0.01) or nonstandard treatment (2/34, 5.9%, P < 0.01). Of 112 infants who commenced the UKISS treatment sequence, 71/112 (63%) responded to prednisolone 40 mg/day. Among non-responders, 12/29 (41%) subsequently responded to prednisolone 60 mg/day, and 10/22 (45%) to vigabatrin. Severe side effects and spasm relapse were not significantly different between each treatment. Conclusion: We confirm higher rates of spasm cessation with initial treatment with prednisolone than vigabatrin and nonstandard therapy. Non-use of prednisolone as first treatment in over one third of infants highlights a concerning treatment gap. The UKISS treatment sequence has high overall treatment response (total 93/112; 83%), with similar benefit of subsequent prednisolone 60 mg/day and vigabatrin in prednisolone 40 mg/day non-responders.
AB - Aim: To report response to first treatment in infants with infantile spasms (IS), including incremental benefit of prednisolone 60 mg/day and vigabatrin following prednisolone 40 mg/day failure in infants commenced on the United Kingdom Infantile Spasms Study (UKISS) treatment sequence. Methods: In this retrospective analysis, we compared effectiveness of prednisolone, vigabatrin and nonstandard treatments as first treatment for IS. In infants who commenced the UKISS treatment sequence, we evaluated response to each step. Primary outcome was spasm cessation after 42 days. Secondary outcomes were severe side effects and spasm relapse after 42 days. Results: Treatment response data were available for 151 infants. First treatment was prednisolone in 99 infants, vigabatrin in 18 and nonstandard treatment in 34. The rate of spasm cessation with first treatment was significantly higher with prednisolone (62/99, 63%) than vigabatrin (5/18, 28%, P = 0.01) or nonstandard treatment (2/34, 5.9%, P < 0.01). Of 112 infants who commenced the UKISS treatment sequence, 71/112 (63%) responded to prednisolone 40 mg/day. Among non-responders, 12/29 (41%) subsequently responded to prednisolone 60 mg/day, and 10/22 (45%) to vigabatrin. Severe side effects and spasm relapse were not significantly different between each treatment. Conclusion: We confirm higher rates of spasm cessation with initial treatment with prednisolone than vigabatrin and nonstandard therapy. Non-use of prednisolone as first treatment in over one third of infants highlights a concerning treatment gap. The UKISS treatment sequence has high overall treatment response (total 93/112; 83%), with similar benefit of subsequent prednisolone 60 mg/day and vigabatrin in prednisolone 40 mg/day non-responders.
KW - infantile spasms
KW - prednisolone
KW - treatment
KW - vigabatrin
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85136862707&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/jpc.16181
DO - 10.1111/jpc.16181
M3 - Article
C2 - 36054157
AN - SCOPUS:85136862707
VL - 58
SP - 2197
EP - 2202
JO - Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health
JF - Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health
SN - 1034-4810
IS - 12
ER -