Long-term response and response patterns to antiepileptic drugs in patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy

Clinical prediction models for treatment outcomes in newly diagnosed epilepsy: A systematic review

Up to 35% of individuals diagnosed with epilepsy continue to have seizures despite treatment, commonly referred to as drug-resistant epilepsy. Uncontrolled seizures can directly, or indirectly, negatively impact an individual's quality of life. To inform clinical management and life decisions, it is important to be able to predict the likelihood of seizure control. Those likely to achieve seizure control will be able to return sooner to their usual work and leisure activities and require less follow-up, whereas those with a poor prognosis will need more frequent clinical attendance and earlier consideration of epilepsy surgery. This is a systematic review aimed at identifying demographic, clinical, physiological (e.g., electroencephalographic), and imaging (e.g., magnetic resonance imaging) factors that may be predictive of treatment outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy (NDE). MEDLINE and Embase were searched for prediction models of treatment outcomes in patients with NDE. Study characteristics were extracted and subjected to assessment of risk of bias (and applicability concerns) using the PROBAST (Prediction Model Risk of Bias Assessment Tool) tool. Baseline variables associated with treatment outcomes are reported as prognostic factors. After screening, 48 models were identified in 32 studies, which generally scored low for concerns of applicability, but universally scored high for susceptibility to bias. Outcomes reported fit broadly into four categories: drug resistance, short-term treatment response, seizure remission, and mortality. Prognostic factors were also heterogenous, but the predictors that were commonly significantly associated with outcomes were those related to seizure characteristics/types, epilepsy history, and age at onset. Antiseizure medication response was often included as a baseline variable, potentially obscuring other factor relationships at baseline. Currently, outcome prediction models for NDE demonstrate a high risk of bias. Model development could be improved with a stronger adherence to recommended TRIPOD (Transparent Reporting of a Multivariable Prediction Model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis) practices. Furthermore, we outline actionable changes to common practices that are intended to improve the overall quality of prediction model development in NDE.

Trends in enzyme-inducing antiseizure medication use: A retrospective analysis among adults with epilepsy

BACKGROUND

Enzyme-inducing antiseizure medications (EIASMs) were associated with drug interactions and long-term adverse effects. Therefore, it was suggested that epilepsy treatment should be started with non-EIASMs, and in patients treated with EIASMs, replacement with non-EIASMs should be evaluated OBJECTIVE: To assess potent EIASM use among patients with epilepsy at their first visit in our epilepsy outpatient clinic.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the computerized database and the medical records of all the patients who had their first visit in our outpatient epilepsy clinic during a 10-year period (2012-2021). Of 730 patients with ASM treated epilepsy, 243 (33%) were receiving potent EIASMs.

RESULTS

The annual potent EIASM use decreased from 35.1 % in 2012 to 11.8 % in 2021. Most of the patients who received potent EIASM had their first visit during 2012-2015 compared to the following years (56.8 % vs 43.2 %) (p = 0.0001). Patients with epilepsy receiving potent EIASMs were older (44.3 vs 34.7) (p = 0.0001), more likely men (60.9 % vs 47.2 %) (p = 0.001), with longer disease duration (13 vs 9.3 y) (p = 0.0001), higher rate of neuropsychiatric comorbidity (37 % vs 27.9 %) (p = 0.014), and were treated with more ASMs (1.6 vs 1.3) (p = 0.0001) compared to patients receiving non-EIASMs.

CONCLUSIONS

Potent EIASM use has been declining over the past decade. Additional efforts to further decrease EIASM use should be exerted among all patients with ASM-treated epilepsy, with emphasis on men with focal epilepsy and epilepsy duration > 10 years.