Systematic review on the efficacy and safety of herbal medicines for Alzheimer's disease

A systematic review was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of herbal medications (HM), as either monotherapy or adjunct to orthodox medications (cholinesterase inhibitors and nootropic agents, OM) for Alzheimer's disease (AD). Sixteen studies testing different HM were included. Out of the 15 HM monotherapy studies, 13 reported HM to be significantly better than OM or placebo; one reported similar efficacy between HM and OM. Only the HM adjuvant study reported significant efficacy. No major adverse events for HM were reported and HMs were found to reduce the adverse effects arising from OM. Imbalance in ethnicity among participants was observed; gender distribution was unclear. Heterogeneity in diagnostic criteria, interventions and outcome measures hindered comprehensive data analysis. Studies comparing HM with OM suggest that HM can be a safe, effective treatment for AD, either alone or in conjunction with OM. Methodological flaws in the design of the studies, however, limited the extent to which the results could be interpreted. Among various HMs, the safety and tolerability of EGb761 was best established. Further multi-center trials with large sample size, high methodological qualities and standardized HM ingredients are necessary for clinical recommendations on the use of HM in treating AD.     

Efficacy, adverse events, and treatment discontinuations in fluoxetine clinical studies of major depression: a meta-analysis of the 20-mg/day dose

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of fluoxetine in adults with moderate-to-severe major depression are well established. However, most analyses combined dosages (20-80 mg/day) of the compound. We hypothesized that in patients taking 20 mg/day, efficacy would be maintained but the incidence of adverse events would be lower. We present a meta-analysis of efficacy and safety data for fluoxetine, 20 mg/day. METHOD: Data were from 3 double-blind studies (N = 417) that included patients with moderate-to-severe major depression (DSM-III or DSM-III-R criteria) who received placebo or fixed-dose 20-mg/day treatment with fluoxetine. Efficacy was assessed using the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D; HAM-D-17 total score and anxiety/somatization, retardation, sleep disturbance, and cognitive disturbance factors) and response and remission rates. Safety assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events, reasons for discontinuation, and adverse events leading to discontinuation. Adverse events were evaluated to determine the emergence of activation and/or sedation. RESULTS: At 20 mg/day, fluoxetine-treated patients demonstrated significantly greater remission and response rates and mean changes on HAM-D-17 total score and anxiety/somatization, retardation, and cognitive disturbance factor scores than placebo-treated patients (p < .001). The incidence of specific adverse events leading to discontinuation and the frequency of study discontinuations due to adverse events were similar among fluoxetine-treated and placebo-treated patients (6.1% vs. 5.8%, p = .879). Several adverse events (insomnia, asthenia, somnolence, gastroenteritis, decreased libido, chills, and confusion) occurred significantly more frequently among fluoxetine-treated patients. A significant change in sedation, but not activation, occurred in patients in the fluoxetine 20-mg/day group compared with the placebo group. CONCLUSION: These data affirm that fluoxetine at 20 mg/day is efficacious, safe, and of similar activation potential when compared with placebo in patients with major depression.     

Clinical effectiveness of acupuncture for optic atrophy in China : A systematic review

视神经萎缩是指视神经纤维逐渐丧失引起视力严重恶化的一种疾病。神经纤维很难再生,目前没有公认的有效治疗药物。但在中国,针灸治疗视神经萎缩广为运用并且疗效显著。基于此,有必要进行系统评价来评估针刺治疗视神经萎缩的有效性和安全性。检索Medline数据库、Embase 数据库、Cochrane 图书馆、中国生物医学文献数据库、清华期刊数据库、维普期刊数据库、万方数据库及国家在研临床试验注册网（年限持续到2008年）中,以针刺治疗与空白、安慰剂、中药或西药对照,或者以针灸加另一疗法与这种疗法比较的随机对照试验文献。文献质量评估以Cochrane对干预措施的系统评价手册5.0.1.为标准。共检索到171个研究,其中7个研究被纳入,但方法学质量普遍低。7个研究中的4个研究具有同质性,被纳入Meta分析,差异具有统计学意义 (95%CI, 2.12 to 4.71),针刺治疗的不良反应没有研究报道。由于缺乏针灸与空白、安慰剂对照的临床试验,故目前没有确切的证据支持针灸治疗视神经萎缩,迫切需要开展适宜对照和设计严谨的随机对照试验。     

Duodopa® treatment for advanced Parkinson's disease: a review of efficacy and safety

Enterally administered levodopa/carbidopa gel (Duodopa^®) is used for the treatment of advanced Parkinson's disease (PD) in patients with motor fluctuations and dyskinesias. This review summarizes the current efficacy and safety data on this drug. Clinically important differences (CID) have been used to assess whether statistical improvements in symptoms translate into meaningful improvements for the patients.A PubMed search in February 2012 found 23 papers with efficacy data and 33 with safety data. Of 11 studies reporting Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) III scores, 10 found improvements that met the CID of 10.8 points. Of 7 studies reporting UPDRS IV scores, 5 found improvements meeting the CID of 2.3 points. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed in 6 studies using the 8- or 39-question version of the Parkinson's disease Questionnaire, and all reported improvements meeting the CID (10 points).Due to the nature of the data, it is not possible to give exact numbers for the frequency of adverse events. However, the findings seem to be in line with a previous report stating the majority of adverse events were related to the infusion system or surgical procedure rather than the drug.In conclusion, the large majority of studies have reported that Duodopa^® is clinically effective in relieving the symptoms of advanced PD and improving QoL in comparison with conventional therapy. High-quality randomized trials with larger patient numbers will yield greater insights into the efficacy and safety of this treatment.     

Effects of risperidone on behavioral and psychological symptoms associated with dementia in clinical practice

BACKGROUND: Risperidone significantly improves behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD), including aggression, agitation and psychosis, as shown by randomized, placebo-controlled trials. METHODS: An 8-week, multicenter, naturalistic, open-label study was carried out to examine whether the benefits of risperidone apply to clinical practice. A total of 4499 patients were treated with risperidone at flexible doses chosen by physicians, and were included in the safety evaluation. Of these, 3909 patients met the intended study criteria (at least 65 years of age, dementia, and the presence of BPSD) and were included in the efficacy analyses. RESULTS: At the end of the study (after 8 weeks of treatment), risperidone (average final dose 1.6 mg/day) significantly improved all symptoms studied (agitation, aggressiveness, disturbance of the sleep-wake rhythm, social withdrawal, suspiciousness and delusions) as rated by physicians on a five-point scale of severity. On a four-point scale of global efficacy, more than 90% of patients were rated improved by both physicians and caregivers after 8 weeks of treatment. A significant improvement in sleep-wake cycle disturbances was also noted. A total of 422 adverse events were documented in 346 of the 4499 patients (7.7%); these included insufficient efficacy (2.6%), extrapyramidal symptoms (0.89%), deterioration of psychiatric symptoms (0.73%), sedation (0.56%), gastrointestinal disturbances (0.49%), cardiovascular disorders (0.38%), and cerebrovascular adverse events (0.36%). CONCLUSIONS: Risperidone is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for BPSD in routine clinical practice.     

Duloxetine in the treatment of major depressive disorder: comparisons of safety and efficacy in U.S. Hispanic and majority Caucasian patients

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate new pharmacotherapies for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in Hispanic Americans, the largest ethnic minority group in the United States. METHOD: Efficacy and safety data were pooled from 7 double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials of duloxetine conducted from February 1999 through November 2002. English-speaking patients (aged > or = 18 years) meeting DSM-IV criteria for MDD received duloxetine (40-120 mg/ day; Hispanic, N = 58; Caucasian, N = 748) or placebo (Hispanic, N = 62; Caucasian, N = 594) for up to 9 weeks. Efficacy measures included the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D-17) total score, HAM-D-17 subscales, the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale, the Patient Global Impression of Improvement scale, and the Visual Analog Scales for pain. Safety was assessed using discontinuation rates, treatment-emergent adverse events, vital signs, and laboratory analyses. Three sets of data were analyzed using different pooling strategies, including exploratory analyses with 470 subjects (Hispanic, N = 51; Caucasian, N = 419) receiving the recommended dose of 60 mg. RESULTS: No evidence for a differential effect of duloxetine in Hispanic and Caucasian patients was found in efficacy outcomes. Discontinuation rates due to adverse events among duloxetine-treated patients were 14.0% for Hispanics and 17.0% for Caucasians, compared with 3.2% and 5.7%, respectively, for placebo-treated patients (p = .671). The type of adverse events and their individual rate of occurrence did not differ significantly between Hispanic and Caucasian patients. Mean changes from baseline for pulse, blood pressure, weight, and laboratory analytes were small and showed no significant differences between Hispanic and Caucasian patients. CONCLUSION: In this analysis of pooled data, no evidence for a differential effect of duloxetine in Hispanic and majority Caucasian patients was found in efficacy or safety outcomes.     

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor and venlafaxine use in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder: a systematic review of published randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: This review critiques published randomized placebo-controlled trials pertaining to the efficacy and safety of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and venlafaxine in the treatment of major depressive disorder in children and adolescents. METHOD: Medline was searched for articles meeting defined inclusion criteria. The following key terms were used: depressive disorders, antidepressive agents, fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline, citalopram, fluvoxamine, venlafaxine, child, and adolescent. RESULTS: Six articles met inclusion criteria. Only 2 studies claim efficacy by significant results in primary outcomes; both have since been contested in further analysis. Not one study adequately examines safety, particularly with respect to whether a link exists between antidepressant use and induction of suicidal ideation or attempts. CONCLUSION: Published studies on SSRI or venlafaxine use in children and adolescents are inconclusive with respect to safety and efficacy, owing to inappropriate claims of efficacy, lack of improvement in global functioning scores, nonstandardized data collection regarding adverse effects, exclusion of suicidal subjects in the recruitment process, grouping of children and adolescents together, small sample sizes, conflict of interest posed by pharmaceutical company sponsorship, and publishing bias. Future investigators should consider these factors when developing study designs.     

The Clinical Global Impressions scale: errors in understanding and use

Objective

The Clinical Global Impressions Severity and Improvement scales (CGI-S and CGI-I) are widely included as efficacy data in psychopharmacology new drug application submissions. This study was conducted to determine the extent to which clinical trials investigators included information unrelated to efficacy in their CGI ratings.

Method

Forty-five principal investigators provided CGI-S and CGI-I ratings of narratives of patients with major depressive disorder or generalized anxiety disorder. Investigators were blindly randomized to receive narratives that either did (experimental) or did not (control) contain indication-unrelated medical or psychiatric adverse events. Investigators then completed a survey assessing CGI-S and CGI-I rating patterns.

Results

CGI-S and CGI-I ratings were significantly more severe and less improved when the narratives contained medical and psychiatric adverse events unrelated to the diseases under study (major depressive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder) than when the narratives did not (Ps < .04). In response to the survey, 46% and 56% of investigators reported that a psychiatric adverse event unrelated to the disease under study would not affect their CGI-S and CGI-I ratings, respectively. Although 87% of investigators reported that their CGI-S and CGI-I ratings would not be affected by a medical adverse event, actual CGI-S ratings were significantly more severe when an unrelated medical adverse event was described as occurring than when it was not (P < .03).

Conclusion

Clinical trials investigators' inclusion of indication-irrelevant adverse events threatens the validity of the CGI as an efficacy measure and may contribute to failure to detect efficacy signals in psychopharmacology clinical trials.     

Duloxetine: A New Treatment for the Emotional and Physical Symptoms of Depression

BACKGROUND: Depression is underdiagnosed in the primary care setting. Physical symptoms such as aches, pains, and gastrointestinal disturbance are frequently associated with major depressive disorder (MDD) and are often the presenting symptoms. Duloxetine, a dual-reuptake inhibitor of serotonin and norepinephrine, may have a positive effect on physical symptoms in addition to efficacy in treating emotional symptoms of depression. METHOD: Efficacy was evaluated in 6 double-blind, placebo- and/or active comparator-controlled trials of duloxetine for patients with MDD (DSM-IV criteria). Efficacy in depression was determined primarily using the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D-17). Secondary efficacy measures included subscales of the HAM-D-17 and assessment of physical symptoms. Safety evaluations included adverse events, vital signs, laboratory analyses, and electrocardiograms. Safety was evaluated by pooling the data from the MDD trials and a study of duloxetine in nondepressed patients. RESULTS: Duloxetine demonstrated significant differences from placebo on core mood symptoms, physical symptoms (e.g., back pain), and global functioning as early as week 1 of treatment. The estimated probabilities of remission in the studies that demonstrated efficacy ranged from 43% to 57%. The most frequently observed adverse events for duloxetine-treated patients included nausea, dizziness, insomnia, fatigue, and somnolence. Duloxetine did not prolong corrected QT intervals, and the rate of sustained elevations of blood pressure did not differ significantly from placebo. CONCLUSION: In these studies, duloxetine was safe and effective in the treatment of both emotional and physical symptoms of MDD. Based on dose assessments, 60 mg q.d. appears to be the optimum starting and therapeutic dose.     

Salivary gland botulinum toxin injections for drooling in children with cerebral palsy and neurodevelopmental disability: a systematic review

Aim The aim of this paper was to systematically review the efficacy and safety of botulinum toxin (BoNT) injections to the salivary glands to treat drooling in children with cerebral palsy and neurodevelopmental disability. Method A systematic search of The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), EMBASE, and the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) was conducted (up to 1 October 2011). Data sources included published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective studies. Results Sixteen studies met inclusion criteria. Three outcome measures support the effectiveness of BoNT for drooling. One RCT found an almost 30% reduction in the impact of drooling on patients’ lives, as measured by the Drooling Impact Scale (mean difference ?27.45; 95% confidence interval [CI] ?35.28 to ?19.62). There were sufficient data to pool results on one outcome measure, the Drooling Frequency and Severity Scale, which supports this result (mean difference ?2.71; 95% CI ?4.82 to ?0.60; p<0.001). There was a significant reduction in the observed number of bibs required per day. The incidence of adverse events ranged from 2 to 41%, but was inconsistently reported. One trial was terminated early because of adverse events. Interpretation BoNT is an effective, temporary treatment for sialorrhoea in children with cerebral palsy. Benefits need to be weighed against the potential for serious adverse events. More studies are needed to address the safety of BoNT and to compare BoNT with other treatment options for drooling.     

Cholinesterase inhibitors in mild cognitive impairment: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Despite being commonly regarded as an initial stage of dementia (particularly of Alzheimer's type, AD), mild cognitive impairment (MCI) is usually not treated and no recommendations for management have been established. Cholinesterase inhibitors have been proposed to halt the progression of MCI to AD and several randomized controlled studies (RCT) have been undertaken to prove this hypothesis. Here we have analyzed the results of RCT of ChEI in MCI. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Four long-term RCT of ChEI in MCI were identified. A meta-analysis was conducted with the Mantel-Haenszel method using a fixed model. We compared a major parameter of efficacy (the proportion of those who progressed to dementia within two years) and two parameters of safety, i.e. the total number of adverse events and the number of adverse events leading to drug discontinuation. RESULTS: The use of ChEI resulted in approximately 24% reduction of risk of conversion from MCI to dementia at the cost of more than 50% increase of adverse events and more than 130% increase of adverse events leading to drug discontinuation, as compared to placebo. Moreover, in the case of galantamine a considerable increase in deaths was observed in the active treatment group; whether this outcome is a class effect of all ChEI or is limited to galantamine cannot be established due to the lack of data from donepezil and rivastigmine trials. CONCLUSIONS: Because of the questionable efficacy : risk ratio, we believe that it is too early to recommend ChEI in MCI. The sine qua non condition is to establish the factors that predict the risk of conversion from MCI to AD.     

Assessment of a dose–response relationship of levetiracetam

The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between levetiracetam dose and both efficacy and safety in adult patients with refractory partial epilepsy. Dose–response relationships for levetiracetam efficacy were evaluated using pooled data from three trials including adults with refractory partial epilepsy. Two were randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trials in which doses of 1000–3000 mg/day of levetiracetam were administered as adjunctive therapy. The third consisted of the two parts of a crossover randomized, double-blind study in which levetiracetam (1000 or 2000 mg/day) or placebo was added to ongoing therapy. Data from each part of the crossover trial were included as if it was an independent parallel-group study. A fourth randomized double-blind trial was added for the safety evaluation. It included data from adults receiving placebo or 2000 mg/day of levetiracetam as adjunctive therapy for refractory partial seizures. The combined analysis showed an increasing effect with increasing dose. The responder rates (≥50% reduction in seizures) for placebo and levetiracetam 1000, 2000, and 3000 mg/day were 13.1%, 28.5%, 34.3%, and 41.3%, respectively. The respective values for seizure freedom were 0.8%, 4.7%, 6.3%, and 8.6%. There was no evidence of a dose–response relationship with regard to adverse events, including those (asthenia, dizziness, somnolence) most commonly associated with this antiepileptic drug. Patients who do not become seizure-free at the lowest recommended levetiracetam dose (1000 mg/day) should be titrated to 2000 or 3000 mg/day to provide the greatest opportunity for efficacy with little or no increased risk for adverse events.     

Continuation treatment of delusional depression in older adults.

Delusional depression responds poorly to acute antidepressant monotherapy but appears to respond to intensive combination pharmacotherapy, however with poor short-term outcomes after initial improvement, particularly in later life. The authors compared the efficacy and safety of continuation combination therapy to monotherapy among older patients after remission from a delusional depression. Twenty-nine older adults with SCID-diagnosed major depression with delusions received continuation treatment with nortriptyline-plus-perphenazine or nortriptyline-plus-placebo under randomized double-blind conditions after achieving remission after ECT. Of the 28 subjects included in efficacy analyses, 25% suffered relapses. The relapse frequency was nonsignificantly greater in combination therapy than in monotherapy subjects. However, combination subjects had significantly more extrapyramidal symptoms, an increased incidence of tardive dyskinesia, and a greater number of falls. Continuation treatment with a conventional antipsychotic does not decrease relapse rates but is associated with significant untoward adverse events in older persons after recovery from a delusional depression.     

Stimulant medications

OBJECTIVE: To review the short- and long-term safety and efficacy of stimulants for the treatment of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHOD: A Medline search was conducted for both randomized controlled trials and reviews to determine the efficacy and safety of stimulant drugs for treating children with ADHD. Information was obtained on adverse events associated with their use, including their impact on height and weight gain during childhood. Animal data were reviewed for information on tolerance, sensitization, and the impact of high-dose stimulant effects on neurons and on the development of hepatic tumors. Human data on dopamine transporter occupancy by stimulants were also included. RESULTS: Stimulant treatment studies show robust short-term efficacy and a good safety profile. Longer-term studies are few in number but have produced no conclusive evidence that careful therapeutic use of these medications is harmful. CONCLUSION: Current evidence indicates that stimulants show efficacy and safety in studies lasting up to 24 months.     

Role of pontomedullary reticular formation neurons in horizontal head movements: an ibotenic acid lesion study in the cat

Single-cell recording, electrolytic lesion and electrical stimulation studies have indicated that the pontomedullary reticular formation (PMRF) plays a role in head movement (HM) control. However, recent studies utilizing excitotoxin lesions of the PMRF have reported no effect on HM. In the present study, we have examined the acute and chronic motor effects of injecting ibotenic acid (IBO) into the nucleus reticularis pontis oralis, nucleus reticularis pontis caudalis and rostral medullary nucleus gigantocellularis of the feline PMRF. IBO injections in all of these regions induced tonic flexion of the head toward the ipsilateral side. This effect lasted 4-16 h. It was followed by a second phase in which head flexion and whole body circling were directed toward the contralateral side. Although this forced contralateral head turning disappeared within two days, the tendency to turn contralaterally and the impaired ability to make rapid ipsilateral HMs were present throughout survival periods lasting more than 4 months. Unilateral IBO PMRF lesions reduced the amplitude of vestibular induced quick phase (anti-compensatory) HMs toward the ipsilateral side and resulted in abnormally large and persistent slow compensatory HMs toward the contralateral side. Following IBO injections, the threshold intensity for HMs evoked by electrical stimulation at the injection site was elevated, and the amplitude and velocity of evoked HMs reduced. Histological data indicated that the reticular area involved in HM control was relatively large and probably extended beyond the PMRF region examined here. However, lesions including the nucleus reticularis pontis caudalis (NRPC) produced more severe and persistent HM deficits than those including the nucleus reticularis gigantocellularis. These data together with available anatomical and electrophysiological evidence indicate that PMRF neurons play a critical role in the generation of fast horizontal HMs toward the ipsilateral side.     

Safety and efficacy of edoxaban in patients undergoing hip fracture surgery

Introduction

Edoxaban is an oral, direct, once-daily factor Xa inhibitor. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of edoxaban compared to subcutaneous enoxaparin in Japanese patients undergoing hip fracture surgery.

Materials and methods

In this multicenter, randomized, open-label, active-comparator, phase 3 trial, 92 patients were randomized 2:1 to receive edoxaban 30 mg once daily (n = 62) or enoxaparin sodium (enoxaparin) 2000 IU (equivalent to 20 mg) twice daily (n = 30) for 11 to 14 days. The primary endpoints were the incidence of major or clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding and incidence of any bleeding events (major, CRNM, or minor bleeding). Secondary efficacy endpoints included the incidence of thromboembolic events, venous thromboembolism-related deaths, and all-cause deaths. Additional adverse events were recorded throughout the study.

Results

In the edoxaban and enoxaparin treatment groups, the incidence of major or CRNM bleeding was 3.4% and 6.9%, respectively, while any bleeding event occurred in 25.4% and 17.2% of patients, respectively. The incidence of thromboembolic events was 6.5% in the edoxaban group and 3.7% in the enoxaparin group. All events were asymptomatic deep vein thrombosis. The incidence of adverse events was 72.9% and 82.8% in the edoxaban and enoxaparin groups, respectively.

Conclusions

Compared to subcutaneous enoxaparin 2000 IU twice daily, oral edoxaban 30 mg once daily demonstrated similar safety and efficacy in the prevention of thromboembolic events in Japanese patients undergoing hip fracture surgery.Clinical trials registration number: NCT01181141.     

Revisión sistemática sobre la eficacia y seguridad de los neuroestimuladores periféricos del ganglio esfenopalatino para el tratamiento de la cefalea crónica en racimos refractaria

IntroductionThis study aimed to assess the safety and effectiveness of peripheral neurostimulation of the sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) in the treatment of refractory chronic cluster headache.DevelopmentVarious medical databases were used to perform a systematic review of the scientific literature. The search for articles continued until 31 October 2016, and included clinical trials, systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses, health technology assessment reports, and clinical practice guidelines that included measurements of efficiency/effectiveness or adverse effects associated with the treatment. The review excluded cohort studies, case-control studies, case series, literature reviews, letters to the editor, opinion pieces, editorials, and studies that had been duplicated or outdated by later publications from the same institution. Regarding effectiveness, we found that SPG stimulation had positive results for pain relief, attack frequency, medication use, and patients’ quality of life. In the results regarding safety, we found a significant number of adverse events in the first 30 days following the intervention. Removal of the device was necessary in some patients. Little follow-up data, and no long-term data, is available.ConclusionsThese results are promising, despite the limited evidence available. We consider it essential for research to continue into the safety and efficacy of SPG stimulation for patients with refractory chronic cluster headache. In cases where this intervention may be indicated, treatment should be closely monitored.     

Off-label psychopharmacologic prescribing for children: History supports close clinical monitoring

The review presents pediatric adverse drug events from a historical perspective and focuses on selected safety issues associated with off-label use of medications for the psychiatric treatment of youth. Clinical monitoring procedures for major psychotropic drug classes are reviewed. Prior studies suggest that systematic treatment monitoring is warranted so as to both minimize risk of unexpected adverse events and exposures to ineffective treatments. Clinical trials to establish the efficacy and safety of drugs currently being used off-label in the pediatric population are needed. In the meantime, clinicians should consider the existing evidence-base for these drugs and institute close clinical monitoring.     

Benzodiazepine use in seizure emergencies: A systematic review

PurposeThe aim of this review was to systematically examine safety and efficacy outcomes, as well as patient/caregiver satisfaction, from clinical studies in pediatric and adult patients treated with benzodiazepines (BZDs) through various administration routes in response to seizure emergencies.MethodsA literature search was conducted to identify articles describing the use of various routes of administration (RoAs) of BZDs for the treatment of seizure emergencies through April 21, 2015, using Embase™ and PubMed®. Eligible studies included (a) randomized controlled trials or (b) controlled nonrandomized clinical trials, either retrospective or prospective. Outcome assessments reviewed were 1) time to administration, 2) time to seizure termination, 3) rate of treatment failure, 4) prevention of seizure recurrence, 5) patient and caregiver treatment satisfaction, 6) adverse events related to BDZ treatment or RoA, and 7) respiratory adverse events.ResultsSeventy-five studies evaluated safety and efficacy using individual or comparator BDZs of various RoAs for treating seizure emergencies in all-aged patients with epilepsy. Buccal, intranasal (IN), or intramuscular (IM) BZDs were often more rapidly administered compared with rectal and intravenous (IV) formulations. Time to seizure termination, seizure recurrence rates, and adverse events were generally similar among RoAs, whereas nonrectal RoAs resulted in greater patient and caregiver satisfaction compared with rectal RoA.SignificanceResults of this systematic literature review suggest that nonrectal and non-IV BZD formulations provide equal or improved efficacy and safety outcomes compared with rectal and IV formulations for the treatment of seizure emergencies.