Search

Background: A quarter of people with intellectual disability (ID) have epilepsy, compared to approximately one in a hundred across the general population. Evidence for the safe and effective prescribing of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) for those with ID is, however, limited. Aims of Study: This study seeks to strengthen the research evidence around Eslicarbazepine Acetate (ESL), a new AED, by comparing response of individuals with ID to those from the general population who do not have ID. Methods: A single data set was created through retrospective data collection from English and Welsh NHS Trusts. The UK‐based Epilepsy Database Research Register (Ep‐ID) data collection and analysis method were used. Results: Data were collected for 93 people (36 ID and 57 'no ID'). Seizure improvement of '>50%' was higher at 12 months for 'no ID' participants (56%), compared to ID participants (35%). Retention rates were slightly higher for those with ID (56% compared to 53%). Neither difference was significant. Conclusions: Tolerance and Efficacy for ID and 'no ID' people in our data set were similar. Seizure improvement and retention rates were slightly lower than that found in other European data sets, but findings strengthen the evidence for the use of ESL in the ID population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Valproate (VPA) is a known teratogen associated with greater risk of major congenital malformations and other neurodevelopmental sequelae than all other licensed antiepileptic medicines. To reduce the potential for VPA‐related teratogenicity, the European Medicines Agency issued recommendations in 2018. Over two‐thirds of women/girls with intellectual disability (ID) may have treatment‐resistant epilepsy that could benefit from VPA treatment. Aims: This investigation compared VPA prescribing practice for women/girls with ID between European countries, specifically evaluating the practice in the UK with that in other countries. Methods: An expert working group with representation from key stake‐holding organizations developed a survey for dissemination to relevant professionals across Europe. Results: Seventy one responses were received (27 UK, 44 Europe). Clinicians in the UK were more likely to report that they are working to mandatory regulations compared with European respondents (P =.015). European respondents were less likely to be aware of user‐independent contraception options (P =.06). In The UK, VPA regulations were more likely to be applied to women with ID than in Europe (P =.024). Conclusion: There is heterogeneity in the application of VPA regulations across Europe for women/girls with ID. In both the UK and Europe, the regulations lack suitable adjustments for specific ID‐related factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]