TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparison of Cosyntropin, Vigabatrin, and Combination Therapy in New-Onset Infantile Spasms in a Prospective Randomized Trial
AU - Knupp, Kelly G.
AU - Coryell, Jason
AU - Singh, Rani K.
AU - Gaillard, William D.
AU - Shellhaas, Renée A.
AU - Koh, Sookyong
AU - Mitchell, Wendy G.
AU - Harini, Chellamani
AU - Millichap, John J.
AU - May, Alison
AU - Dlugos, Dennis
AU - Nickels, Katherine
AU - Mytinger, John R.
AU - Keator, Cynthia
AU - Yozawitz, Elissa
AU - Singhal, Nilika
AU - Lockrow, Jason
AU - Thomas, Jacob F.
AU - Juarez-Colunga, Elizabeth
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: KGK has received funding from PERF and has served as a paid consultant for Zogenix Inc, Biomarin, Stoke Therapeutics, Epygenix, Encoded, and Biocodex. RAS receives research support from PCORI, NIH, and the Pediatric Epilepsy Research Foundation, as well as from the University of Michigan Charles Woodson Pediatric Research Fund. She receives royalties from UpToDate for authorship of topics related to neonatal seizures, serves as a consultant for the Epilepsy Study Consortium, and is an associate editor for Neurology. JRM receives honorarium from Elsevier for his role as an associate editor. DD receives research support from NIH, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Health, PERF, and The Epilepsy Study Consortium. He is an investigator on research grants awarded to CHOP from Neurelis, Aquestive, Bio-Pharm, SK Life Sciences, and Encoded Therapeutics.
Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2022.
PY - 2022/3
Y1 - 2022/3
N2 - Objective: In a randomized trial, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of cosyntropin injectable suspension, 1 mg/mL, compared to vigabatrin for infantile spasms syndrome. An additional arm was included to assess the efficacy of combination therapy (cosyntropin and vigabatrin) compared with cosyntropin monotherapy. Methods: Children (2 months to 2 years) with new-onset infantile spasms syndrome and hypsarhythmia were randomized into 3 arms: cosyntropin, vigabatrin, and cosyntropin and vigabatrin combined. Daily seizures and adverse events were recorded, and EEG was repeated at day 14 to assess for resolution of hypsarhythmia. The primary outcome measure was the composite of resolution of hypsarhythmia and absence of clinical spasms at day 14. Fisher exact test was used to compare outcomes. Results: 37 children were enrolled and 34 were included in the final efficacy analysis (1 withdrew prior to treatment and 2 did not return seizure diaries). Resolution of both hypsarhythmia and clinical spasms was achieved in in 9 of 12 participants (75%) treated with cosyntropin, 1/9 (11%) vigabatrin, and 5/13 (38%) cosyntropin and vigabatrin combined. The primary comparison of cosyntropin versus vigabatrin was significant (64% [95% confidence interval 21, 82], P <.01). Adverse events were reported in all 3 treatment arms: 31 (86%) had an adverse event, 7 (19%) had a serious adverse event, and 15 (42%) had an adverse event of special interest with no difference between treatment arms. Significance: This randomized trial was underpowered because of incomplete enrollment, yet it demonstrated that cosyntropin was more effective for short-term outcomes than vigabatrin as initial treatment for infantile spasms.
AB - Objective: In a randomized trial, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of cosyntropin injectable suspension, 1 mg/mL, compared to vigabatrin for infantile spasms syndrome. An additional arm was included to assess the efficacy of combination therapy (cosyntropin and vigabatrin) compared with cosyntropin monotherapy. Methods: Children (2 months to 2 years) with new-onset infantile spasms syndrome and hypsarhythmia were randomized into 3 arms: cosyntropin, vigabatrin, and cosyntropin and vigabatrin combined. Daily seizures and adverse events were recorded, and EEG was repeated at day 14 to assess for resolution of hypsarhythmia. The primary outcome measure was the composite of resolution of hypsarhythmia and absence of clinical spasms at day 14. Fisher exact test was used to compare outcomes. Results: 37 children were enrolled and 34 were included in the final efficacy analysis (1 withdrew prior to treatment and 2 did not return seizure diaries). Resolution of both hypsarhythmia and clinical spasms was achieved in in 9 of 12 participants (75%) treated with cosyntropin, 1/9 (11%) vigabatrin, and 5/13 (38%) cosyntropin and vigabatrin combined. The primary comparison of cosyntropin versus vigabatrin was significant (64% [95% confidence interval 21, 82], P <.01). Adverse events were reported in all 3 treatment arms: 31 (86%) had an adverse event, 7 (19%) had a serious adverse event, and 15 (42%) had an adverse event of special interest with no difference between treatment arms. Significance: This randomized trial was underpowered because of incomplete enrollment, yet it demonstrated that cosyntropin was more effective for short-term outcomes than vigabatrin as initial treatment for infantile spasms.
KW - ACTH
KW - West syndrome
KW - hypsarrhythmia
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85123467324&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85123467324&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/08830738211073400
DO - 10.1177/08830738211073400
M3 - Article
C2 - 35044272
AN - SCOPUS:85123467324
SN - 0883-0738
VL - 37
SP - 186
EP - 193
JO - Journal of Child Neurology
JF - Journal of Child Neurology
IS - 3
ER -