Comparison of carbamazepine, phenobarbital, phenytoin, and primidone in partial and secondarily generalized tonic-clonic seizures

Approach to Patients with Seizures and Epilepsy: A Guide for Primary Care Physicians

Seizures and epilepsy are common neurologic conditions that are frequently encountered in the outpatient primary care setting. An accurate diagnosis relies on a thorough clinical history and evaluation. Understanding seizure semiology and classification is crucial in conducting the initial assessment. Knowledge of common seizure triggers and provoking factors can further guide diagnostic testing and initial management. The pharmacodynamic characteristics and side effect profiles of anti-seizure medications are important considerations when deciding treatment and counseling patients, particularly those with comorbidities and in special populations such as patient of childbearing potential.

Sexual dysfunction and commonly used drugs in neurology

Sexual dysfunction is common in men and women with neurological diseases. Medications used in neurology can cause sexual dysfunction independently of the disease process and this may adversely affect patients' quality of life. This review focuses on medications commonly prescribed to neurological patients that may contribute to altered sexual function, and discusses how they may differ in men and women.

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.

Narrative Review of Topiramate: Clinical Uses and Pharmacological Considerations

Due to the diverse mechanisms of action of antiseizure drugs, there has been a rise in prescriptions of these drugs for non-epileptic pathologies. One drug that is now being used for a variety of conditions is topiramate. This is a narrative review that used PubMed, Google Scholar, MEDLINE, and ScienceDirect to review literature on the clinical and pharmacologic properties of topiramate. Topiramate is a commonly prescribed second-generation antiseizure drug. The drug works through multiple pathways to prevent seizures. In this regard, topiramate blocks sodium and calcium voltage-gated channels, inhibits glutamate receptors, enhances gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptors, and inhibits carbonic anhydrase. Topiramate is approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for epilepsy treatment and migraine prophylaxis. Topiramate in combination with phentermine is also FDA-approved for weight loss in patients with a body mass index (BMI) > 30. The current target dosing for topiramate monotherapy is 400 mg/day and 100 mg/day to treat epilepsy and migraines, respectively. Commonly reported side effects include paresthesia, confusion, fatigue, dizziness, and change in taste. More uncommon and serious adverse effects can include acute glaucoma, metabolic acidosis, nephrolithiasis, hepatotoxicity, and teratogenicity. Related to a broad side effect profile, physicians prescribing this drug should routinely monitor for side effects and/or toxicity. The present investigation reviews various anti-seizure medications before summarizing indications of topiramate, off-label uses, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, adverse effects, and drug-drug interactions.

Differential effects of carbamazepine and levetiracetam monotherapy on reproductive endocrine function in Nigerian women with epilepsy

Objective

This study is aimed at comparing differential effect of Levetiracetam (LTC) monotherapy and Carbamazepine (CZP) monotherapy in W omen with epilepsy (WWE) on gonadal hormone.

Methods

87 WWE were recruited comprising randomly of 46 and 41 on CZP and LTC group respectively with diagnosis and classification based on International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE). Reproductive hormones (Luteinizing Hormone (LH), Follicle stimulating hormone, progesterone, estradiol and testosterone) were assayed. National Hospital Seizure Severity Scale (NHSS) and Zung self-reporting depression scale (ZSRDS) were used to assess the seizure severity and the mood respectively. Data was analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20. The Chi-square test was used to compare categorical variables while Student's t-test or its non-parametric equivalent where appropriate were used to compare continuous variables.

Results

Clinical characteristics were comparable in both groups except for ZSRDS (p = 0.048), NHSS (p = 0.012) and hip circumference (p = 0.037). The CZP group had a higher ASEX score and proportion of WWE with clinically significant sexual dysfunction (p < 0.001). WWE on LTC had similar hormonal profiles with those on CZP except for a higher median serum testosterone level (p = 0.004), and lower median serum LH (p = 0.006). Age was negatively associated with serum testosterone level for the 25th, 50th, and 75th quartile. However, the differential effect for AED type was only significant for the 25th quartile; with higher values in LTC.

Conclusion

The therapeutics implication of lower LH and testosterone levels in the LTC group compared to CZP group need to be explored.

What are the considerations when initiating treatment for epilepsy in children?

INTRODUCTION

There is a very wide spectrum of epilepsies and developmental and epileptic encephalopathies that affect children, from self-limited forms, not necessarily requiring treatment, to severe drug-resistant ones.

AREAS COVERED

In this perspective, the authors discuss the main factors to consider before drug prescription in children, considering the most recent clinical research, including age, seizure type, epilepsy syndrome, etiology, efficacy and safety profile, comorbidities, gender, available formulations, costs and drug coverage, and regulatory issues. The literature search was conducted through a PubMed search on antiseizure medications for patients aged 0-18, with respect to each of the aforementioned factors, and by checking the reference lists of relevant papers.

EXPERT OPINION

The most expanding field of research and innovation for clinical practice is precision medicine, which addresses the holistic treatment of genetic epilepsies and developmental and epileptic encephalopathies. It achieves this by addressing their detrimental effects on synapses, neurotransmission, and cellular signaling pathways with the double aim to treat seizures and to rescue neurodevelopmental trajectories, but also the issue of adverse events and drug resistance through pharmacogenomics.

Failure to use new breakthrough treatments for epilepsy

Despite the approval of ~20 additional antiseizure medications (ASMs) since the 1980s, one-third of epilepsy patients experience seizures despite therapy. Drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) is associated with cognitive and psychiatric comorbidities, socioeconomic impairment, injuries, and a 9.3-13.4 times higher mortality rate than in seizure-free patients. Improved seizure control can reduce morbidity and mortality. Two new ASMs were launched in the United States in 2020: cenobamate for focal epilepsy in adults and fenfluramine for Dravet syndrome (DS). They offer markedly improved efficacy. Cenobamate achieved 21% seizure freedom with the highest dose and decreased tonic-clonic seizures by 93% during maintenance treatment in a randomized clinical trial (RCT). In long-term, open-label studies, 10%-36% of patients were seizure-free for a median duration of ~30-45 months. Fenfluramine treatment in DS reduced convulsive seizure frequency by 56% over placebo at the highest dose, with 8% of patients free of convulsive seizures, and 25% with only one convulsive seizure over 14 weeks. These results were sustained for up to 3 years in open-label extension studies. Mortality was reduced 5-fold. These results are superior to all other approved ASMs, placing these two drugs among the most effective antiseizure therapies. The adverse event profiles resemble those of other ASMs. Despite greater efficacy and similar toxicity, these medications are infrequently used. Two years after US market entry, < 5% of either adults with focal DRE or patients with DS were treated with either cenobamate or fenfluramine. We believe this is a failure of our medical system, resulting from limited knowledge about these drugs stemming partly from the separation of academia from industry; restrictions to access created by health care payors, hospitals, and regulatory agencies; and insufficient post-launch information about the efficacy and safety of these ASMs.

Seizure severity assessment tools for adult epilepsy patients: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Seizure outcomes from antiseizure medication (ASM) therapy can be measured across various domains using assessment tools. The available tools may contain an array of different components or items. Seizure severity assessment, as opposed to seizure frequency count may have been a more accurate measurement in determining the effectiveness of ASM therapy. This study aimed to review studies developing seizure severity assessment tools for adults with epilepsy, describe the development methods and validation, and compare the list of items in these tools.

METHODS

The systematic search utilized established databases such as Scopus, Ovid, Web of Science, Medline, Wiley Online, and Cochrane Library. Studies published from inception to December 15, 2022, were selected. Publications describing the development of tools to measure seizure severity among adult epilepsy patients were included. Outcome measures including the tool's content, development methods, validity, and reliability assessments were compared.

RESULTS

The search produced eight publications describing the development of eight seizure severity assessment tools. One of these tools is part of a multidimensional assessment of the overall impact of epilepsy. The frequently used method in the initial development was the qualitative method (n = 6) where two publications reanalyzed the items from previous studies. Face validity was the most common validation test conducted (n = 4). At least one reliability assessment was conducted for each of the tools, most commonly by the test-retest method (n = 6) and inter-rater reliability (n = 5). All of these tools cover the components of pre-ictal (warning/aura), ictal, and postictal (recovery) events.

CONCLUSION

The identified tools described the assessment of seizure severity using various subscales. The emergence of new methods in quantifying seizure severity unfolds opportunities in discovering more comprehensive assessments of seizure severity in both clinical trials and daily clinical practice.

Levetiracetam, from broad-spectrum use to precision prescription: A narrative review and expert opinion

Levetiracetam (LEV) is an antiseizure medication (ASM) whose mechanism of action involves the modulation of neurotransmitters release through binding to the synaptic vesicle glycoprotein 2A. It is a broad-spectrum ASM displaying favorable pharmacokinetic and tolerability profiles. Since its introduction in 1999, it has been widely prescribed, becoming the first-line treatment for numerous epilepsy syndromes and clinical scenarios. However, this might have resulted in overuse. Increasing evidence, including the recently published SANAD II trials, suggests that other ASMs are reasonable therapeutic options for generalized and focal epilepsies. Not infrequently, these ASMs show better safety and effectiveness profiles compared to LEV (partially due to the latter's well-known cognitive and behavioral adverse effects, present in up to 20% of patients). Moreover, it has been shown that the underlying etiology of epilepsy is significantly linked to ASMs response in particular scenarios, highlighting the importance of an etiology-based ASM choice. In the case of LEV, it has demonstrated an optimal effectiveness in Alzheimer's disease, Down syndrome, and PCDH19-related epilepsies whereas, in other etiologies such as malformations of cortical development, it may show negligible effects. This narrative review analyzes the current evidence related to the use of LEV for the treatment of seizures. Illustrative clinical scenarios and practical decision-making approaches are also addressed, therefore aiming to define a rational use of this ASM.

N-Type Ca Channel in Epileptic Syndromes and Epilepsy: A Systematic Review of Its Genetic Variants

N-type voltage-gated calcium channel controls the release of neurotransmitters from neurons. The association of other voltage-gated calcium channels with epilepsy is well-known. The association of N-type voltage-gated calcium channels and pain has also been established. However, the relationship between this type of calcium channel and epilepsy has not been specifically reviewed. Therefore, the present review systematically summarizes existing publications regarding the genetic associations between N-type voltage-dependent calcium channel and epilepsy.

Is the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma a putative target for epilepsy treatment? Current evidence and future perspectives

The peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARγ), which belongs to the family of nuclear receptors, has been mainly studied as an important factor in metabolic disorders. However, in recent years the potential role of PPARγ in different neurological diseases has been increasingly investigated. Especially, in the search of therapeutic targets for patients with epilepsy the question of the involvement of PPARγ in seizure control has been raised. Epilepsy is a chronic neurological disorder causing a major impact on the psychological, social, and economic conditions of patients and their families, besides the problems of the disease itself. Considering that the world prevalence of epilepsy ranges between 0.5% - 1.0%, this condition is the fourth for importance among the other neurological disorders, following migraine, stroke, and dementia. Among others, temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) is the most common form of epilepsy in adult patients. About 65% of individuals who receive antiseizure medications (ASMs) experience seizure independence. For those in whom seizures still recur, investigating PPARγ could lead to the development of novel ASMs. This review focuses on the most important findings from recent investigations about the potential intracellular PPARγ-dependent processes behind different compounds that exhibited anti-seizure effects. Additionally, recent clinical investigations are discussed along with the promising results found for PPARγ agonists and the ketogenic diet (KD) in various rodent models of epilepsy.

Anti-seizure efficacy and retention rate of carbamazepine is highly variable in randomized controlled trials: A meta-analysis

We sought to assess the anti-seizure efficacy of carbamazepine (CBZ) and retention rate (RR) in randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) in epilepsy. Our analysis was carried out according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Inclusion criteria were monotherapy of CBZ in adequate dosage for epilepsy treatment and RCT duration of ≥3 months. Outcome measures were seizure freedom rate (SFR) and RR. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to allow for comparison with other anti-seizure medications (ASMs). Thirty RCTs of 734 were included. SFR at last follow-up ranged from 11% at 36 months to 85% at 3 months. The aggregated SFR at 6 months was 58% (CI 49-66%) and 48% (CI 40-57%) at 12 months. The 6-month SFR among blinded studies was 55% (CI 43-66%), compared with 61% (CI 50-71%) in unblinded studies. The 12-month SFR was not significantly linked to the age of study participants. RR varied from 36% at 24 months to 81% at 6 months. When adjusting for blinding, the aggregated 6-month RR in blinded studies was 59% (CI 52-66%) vs 76% (CI 71-81%) in unblinded studies. The point estimates of SFR of all RCTs showed an upward time trend, with an increase of approximately 15% between the years 1981 and 2018. In conclusion, the SFR and RR of CBZ were highly variable in RCTs and especially affected by study duration and blinding. These results underscore the impact of the design of RCTs investigating ASM and may challenge the wide use of CBZ as a comparator.

Profiles of indigenous patients with epilepsy in a Brazilian village

INTRODUCTION

Identifying epilepsy in local indigenous populations and describing its epidemiological, etiological, electroencephalographic, and therapeutic aspects can assist public health policies planning toward epilepsy in indigenous communities.

METHODS

This descriptive, cross-sectional study investigated epilepsy among indigenous people residing in Jaguapirú Village, Dourados, Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil. Participants had their clinical histories reviewed and physical examination performed, as well as one or more electroencephalograms (EEG) registered. Other laboratory tests and neuroimaging data available were analyzed and patients with nonepileptic paroxysmal events were additionally identified.

RESULTS

Out of 2,994 respondents, 49 had a confirmed diagnosis of epilepsy (2.37%) and 22 had self-limited epileptic syndromes, a rate that exceeds the global prevalence but is close to other data reported in the Brazilian population. Focal epilepsy, predominantly from temporal lobe origin, was the most prevalent epileptic syndrome (71.4%). Febrile seizures occurred in only 0.4% of respondents, much lower rate than reported in the general population, which can be attributed to the cross-sectional study design. The etiology of epilepsy was undetermined in 82.6% of cases, with the remaining cases attributed to head trauma, hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, and brain malformations. A history of delayed neuropsychomotor development was significantly associated with epilepsy. Monotherapy with first-generation antiseizure medications was greatly effective in most epilepsy cases (87.7%). Electroencephalogram helped to define focal epilepsies and diagnose seizures of nonepileptic origin; the latter mostly included cases of psychogenic seizures and, less frequently, syncope.

CONCLUSION

Diagnosing epilepsy, its clinical presentation, and therapeutical response profile in traditional communities is essential for the establishment of public health policies in developing countries and may help community involvement for successful treatment.

Antiseizure Medications for Adults With Epilepsy: A Review

IMPORTANCE

Epilepsy affects approximately 65 million people worldwide. Persistent seizures are associated with a 20% to 40% risk of bodily injuries (eg, fractures, burns, concussions) over 12-month follow-up. The primary goal of epilepsy treatment is to eliminate seizures while minimizing adverse effects of antiseizure drugs (ASDs).

OBSERVATIONS

An epileptic seizure is defined as a sudden occurrence of transient signs and symptoms caused by abnormal and excessive or synchronous neuronal activity in the brain. Focal and generalized epilepsy are the 2 most frequent types of epilepsy; diagnosis is based on the type of seizures. There are 26 US Food and Drug Administration-approved medications for epilepsy, of which 24 have similar antiseizure efficacy for focal epilepsy and 9 have similar efficacy for generalized epilepsy. The decision to initiate an ASD should be individualized, but should be strongly considered after 2 unprovoked seizures or after 1 unprovoked seizure that occurred during sleep and/or in the presence of epileptiform activity on an electroencephalogram and/or in the presence of a structural lesion on the brain magnetic resonance imaging. The ASDs must be selected based on the seizure and epilepsy types, the epilepsy syndrome, and the adverse effects associated with the drug. For focal epilepsy, oxcarbazepine and lamotrigine are first-line therapy, while levetiracetam can be also considered if there is no history of psychiatric disorder. For generalized epilepsy, the selection of the ASD is based on the type of epilepsy syndrome and the patient's sex, age, and psychiatric history. Seizure freedom is achieved in approximately 60% to 70% of all patients. A total of 25% to 50% of patients also experience neurologic, psychiatric, cognitive, or medical disorders, such as mood, anxiety, and attention deficit disorders and migraines. For these patients, selecting an ASD should consider the presence of these disorders and concomitant use of medications to treat them. ASDs with cytochrome P450 enzyme-inducing properties (eg, carbamazepine, phenytoin) may worsen comorbid coronary and cerebrovascular disease by causing hyperlipidemia and accelerating the metabolism of concomitant drugs used for their treatment. They can also facilitate the development of osteopenia and osteoporosis.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Epilepsy affects approximately 65 million people worldwide and is associated with increased rates of bodily injuries and mortality when not optimally treated. For focal and generalized epilepsy, selection of ASDs should consider the seizure and epilepsy types and epilepsy syndrome, as well as the patient's age and sex, comorbidities, and potential drug interactions.

Approach to the Medical Treatment of Epilepsy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article discusses the use of antiseizure medications in the treatment of focal and generalized epilepsies using an evidence-based approach.

RECENT FINDINGS

In recent years, several new antiseizure medications with differing mechanisms of action have been introduced in clinical practice, and their efficacy and safety has been evaluated in randomized controlled clinical trials. Currently, all antiseizure medications can prevent seizure occurrence, but they have no proven disease-modifying or antiepileptogenic effects in humans. The choice of therapy should integrate the best available evidence of efficacy, tolerability, and effectiveness derived from clinical trials with other pharmacologic considerations, the clinical expertise of the treating physicians, and patient values and preferences. After the failure of a first antiseizure medication, inadequate evidence is available to inform policy. An alternative monotherapy (especially if the failure is because of adverse effects) or a dual therapy (especially if failure is because of inadequate seizure control) can be used.

SUMMARY

Currently, several antiseizure medications are available for the treatment of focal or generalized epilepsies. They differ in mechanisms of action, frequency of administration, and pharmacologic properties, with a consequent risk of pharmacokinetic interactions. Major unmet needs remain in epilepsy treatment. A substantial proportion of patients with epilepsy continue to experience seizures despite two or more antiseizure medications, with a negative impact on quality of life. Therefore, more antiseizure medications that could provide higher seizure control with good tolerability and that could positively affect the underlying disease are needed.

Update on Antiseizure Medications 2022

EDITORS NOTE

The article "Update on Antiseizure Medications 2022" by Dr Abou-Khalil was first published in the February 2016 Epilepsy issue of Continuum: Lifelong Learning in Neurology as "Antiepileptic Drugs," and at the request of the Editor-in-Chief was updated by Dr Abou-Khalil for the 2019 issue and again for this issue.

Antiepileptic drug monotherapy for epilepsy: a network meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in 2017. Epilepsy is a common neurological condition with a worldwide prevalence of around 1%. Approximately 60% to 70% of people with epilepsy will achieve a longer-term remission from seizures, and most achieve that remission shortly after starting antiepileptic drug treatment. Most people with epilepsy are treated with a single antiepileptic drug (monotherapy) and current guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom for adults and children recommend carbamazepine or lamotrigine as first-line treatment for focal onset seizures and sodium valproate for generalised onset seizures; however, a range of other antiepileptic drug (AED) treatments are available, and evidence is needed regarding their comparative effectiveness in order to inform treatment choices.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the time to treatment failure, remission and first seizure of 12 AEDs (carbamazepine, phenytoin, sodium valproate, phenobarbitone, oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, gabapentin, topiramate, eventrate, zonisamide, eslicarbazepine acetate, lacosamide) currently used as monotherapy in children and adults with focal onset seizures (simple focal, complex focal or secondary generalised) or generalised tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalised seizure types (absence, myoclonus).

SEARCH METHODS

For the latest update, we searched the following databases on 12 April 2021: the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), which includes PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialised Register and MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to April 09, 2021). We handsearched relevant journals and contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators and experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of a monotherapy design in adults or children with focal onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual participant data (IPD) and network meta-analysis (NMA) review. Our primary outcome was 'time to treatment failure', and our secondary outcomes were 'time to achieve 12-month remission', 'time to achieve six-month remission', and 'time to first seizure post-randomisation'. We performed frequentist NMA to combine direct evidence with indirect evidence across the treatment network of 12 drugs. We investigated inconsistency between direct 'pairwise' estimates and NMA results via node splitting. Results are presented as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and we assessed the certainty of the evidence using the CiNeMA approach, based on the GRADE framework. We have also provided a narrative summary of the most commonly reported adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

IPD were provided for at least one outcome of this review for 14,789 out of a total of 22,049 eligible participants (67% of total data) from 39 out of the 89 eligible trials (43% of total trials). We could not include IPD from the remaining 50 trials in analysis for a variety of reasons, such as being unable to contact an author or sponsor to request data, data being lost or no longer available, cost and resources required to prepare data being prohibitive, or local authority or country-specific restrictions. No IPD were available from a single trial of eslicarbazepine acetate, so this AED could not be included in the NMA. Network meta-analysis showed high-certainty evidence that for our primary outcome, 'time to treatment failure', for individuals with focal seizures; lamotrigine performs better than most other treatments in terms of treatment failure for any reason and due to adverse events, including the other first-line treatment carbamazepine; HRs (95% CIs) for treatment failure for any reason for lamotrigine versus: eventrate 1.01 (0.88 to 1.20), zonisamide 1.18 (0.96 to 1.44), lacosamide 1.19 (0.90 to 1.58), carbamazepine 1.26 (1.10 to 1.44), oxcarbazepine 1.30 (1.02 to 1.66), sodium valproate 1.35 (1.09 to 1.69), phenytoin 1.44 (1.11 to 1.85), topiramate 1.50 (1.23 to 1.81), gabapentin 1.53 (1.26 to 1.85), phenobarbitone 1.97 (1.45 to 2.67). No significant difference between lamotrigine and eventrate was shown for any treatment failure outcome, and both AEDs seemed to perform better than all other AEDs. For people with generalised onset seizures, evidence was more limited and of moderate certainty; no other treatment performed better than first-line treatment sodium valproate, but there were no differences between sodium valproate, lamotrigine or eventrate in terms of treatment failure; HRs (95% CIs) for treatment failure for any reason for sodium valproate versus: lamotrigine 1.06 (0.81 to 1.37), eventrate 1.13 (0.89 to 1.42), gabapentin 1.13 (0.61 to 2.11), phenytoin 1.17 (0.80 to 1.73), oxcarbazepine 1.24 (0.72 to 2.14), topiramate 1.37 (1.06 to 1.77), carbamazepine 1.52 (1.18 to 1.96), phenobarbitone 2.13 (1.20 to 3.79), lacosamide 2.64 (1.14 to 6.09). Network meta-analysis also showed high-certainty evidence that for secondary remission outcomes, few notable differences were shown for either seizure type; for individuals with focal seizures, carbamazepine performed better than gabapentin (12-month remission) and sodium valproate (six-month remission). No differences between lamotrigine and any AED were shown for individuals with focal seizures, or between sodium valproate and other AEDs for individuals with generalised onset seizures. Network meta-analysis also showed high- to moderate-certainty evidence that, for 'time to first seizure,' in general, the earliest licensed treatments (phenytoin and phenobarbitone) performed better than the other treatments for individuals with focal seizures; phenobarbitone performed better than both first-line treatments carbamazepine and lamotrigine. There were no notable differences between the newer drugs (oxcarbazepine, topiramate, gabapentin, eventrate, zonisamide and lacosamide) for either seizure type. Generally, direct evidence (where available) and network meta-analysis estimates were numerically similar and consistent with confidence intervals of effect sizes overlapping. There was no important indication of inconsistency between direct and network meta-analysis results. The most commonly reported adverse events across all drugs were drowsiness/fatigue, headache or migraine, gastrointestinal disturbances, dizziness/faintness and rash or skin disorders; however, reporting of adverse events was highly variable across AEDs and across studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

High-certainty evidence demonstrates that for people with focal onset seizures, current first-line treatment options carbamazepine and lamotrigine, as well as newer drug eventrate, show the best profile in terms of treatment failure and seizure control as first-line treatments. For people with generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other seizure types), current first-line treatment sodium valproate has the best profile compared to all other treatments, but lamotrigine and eventrate would be the most suitable alternative first-line treatments, particularly for those for whom sodium valproate may not be an appropriate treatment option. Further evidence from randomised controlled trials recruiting individuals with generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other seizure types) is needed.

Genetic generalized epilepsies in adults - challenging assumptions and dogmas

Genetic generalized epilepsy (GGE) syndromes start during childhood or adolescence, and four commonly persist into adulthood, making up 15-20% of all cases of epilepsy in adults. These four GGE syndromes are childhood absence epilepsy, juvenile absence epilepsy, juvenile myoclonic epilepsy and epilepsy with generalized tonic-clonic seizures alone. However, in ~20% of patients with GGE, characteristics of more than one syndrome are present. Novel insights into the genetic aetiology, comorbidities and prognosis of the GGE syndromes have emerged and challenge traditional concepts about these conditions. Evidence has shown that the mode of inheritance in GGE is mostly polygenic. Neuropsychological and imaging studies indicate similar abnormalities in unaffected relatives of patients with GGE, supporting the concept that underlying alterations in bilateral frontothalamocortical networks are genetically determined. Contrary to popular belief, first-line anti-seizure medication often fails to provide seizure freedom in combination with good tolerability. Nevertheless, long-term follow-up studies have shown that with advancing age, many patients can discontinue their anti-seizure medication without seizure relapses. Several outcome predictors have been identified, but prognosis across the syndromes is more homogeneous than previously assumed. Overall, overlap in pathophysiology, seizure types, treatment responses and outcomes support the idea that GGEs are not separate nosological entities but represent a neurobiological continuum.

The effect of sulfasalazine in pentylenetetrazole-induced seizures in rats

We aimed to reveal the anti-convulsant effects sulfasalazine and its mechanism in pentylenetetrazole (PTZ)-induced seizures in rats. Forty-eight male Wistar albino rats (200-250 g) were randomly divided into two groups: 24 for electroencephalography (EEG) recording (group A) and 24 for behavioral studies (group B). About 70 mg/kg PTZ was used for behavioral studies after sulfasalazine administration and 35 mg/kg PTZ was used for EEG recording after sulfasalazine administration. Electrodes were implanted on the dura mater over the left frontal cortex and the reference electrode was implanted over the cerebellum for EEG recording. Racine's convulsion scale, first myoclonic jerk onset time, spike percentages, brain malondialdehyde (MDA), superoxide dismutase (SOD), and prostaglandin F2α (PGF2α) levels were evaluated between the groups. First myoclonic jerk onset time was significantly shorter in the saline group than both 250 and 500 mg/kg sulfasalazine groups (P<0.05). Racine's convulsion scores were significantly lower in the 250 and 500 mg/kg sulfasalazine groups than the saline group (P<0.05, P<0.001). The two sulfasalazine groups had lower spike percentages than the saline group (P<0.05). Significantly lower MDA and PGF2α levels were observed in the 250 and 500 mg/kg sulfasalazine groups compared with the saline group (P<0.05, P<0.001, respectively). SOD increased significantly in both sulfasalazine groups compared with the PTZ+saline group (P<0.05). Our study demonstrated that sulfasalazine had protective effects on PTZ-induced convulsions by protecting against oxidative and inflammatory damage associated with PTZ.

Analysis and Construction of a Molecular Diagnosis Model of Drug-Resistant Epilepsy Based on Bioinformatics

Background: Epilepsy is a complex chronic disease of the nervous system which influences the health of approximately 70 million patients worldwide. In the past few decades, despite the development of novel antiepileptic drugs, around one-third of patients with epilepsy have developed drug-resistant epilepsy. We performed a bioinformatic analysis to explore the underlying diagnostic markers and mechanisms of drug-resistant epilepsy.

Methods: Weighted correlation network analysis (WGCNA) was applied to genes in epilepsy samples downloaded from the Gene Expression Omnibus database to determine key modules. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression and support vector machine-recursive feature elimination (SVM-RFE) algorithms were used to screen the genes resistant to carbamazepine, phenytoin, and valproate, and sensitivity of the three-class classification SVM model was verified through the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve. A protein–protein interaction (PPI) network was utilized to analyze the protein interaction relationship. Finally, ingenuity pathway analysis (IPA) was adopted to conduct disease and function pathway and network analysis.

Results: Through WGCNA, 72 genes stood out from the key modules related to drug resistance and were identified as candidate resistance genes. Intersection analysis of the results of the LASSO and SVM-RFE algorithms selected 11, 4, and 5 drug-resistant genes for carbamazepine, phenytoin, and valproate, respectively. Subsequent union analysis obtained 17 hub resistance genes to construct a three-class classification SVM model. ROC showed that the model could accurately predict patient resistance. Expression of 17 hub resistance genes in healthy subjects and patients was significantly different. The PPI showed that there are six resistance genes (CD247, CTSW, IL2RB, MATK, NKG7, and PRF1) that may play a central role in the resistance of epilepsy patients. Finally, IPA revealed that resistance genes (PRKCH and S1PR5) were involved in “CREB signaling in Neurons.”

Conclusion: We obtained a three-class SVM model that can accurately predict the drug resistance of patients with epilepsy, which provides a new theoretical basis for research and treatment in the field of drug-resistant epilepsy. Moreover, resistance genes PRKCH and S1PR5 may cooperate with other resistance genes to exhibit resistance effects by regulation of the cAMP-response element-binding protein (CREB) signaling pathway.

Efficacy and tolerability of antiseizure drugs

Drug-resistant epilepsy occurs in 25-30% of patients. Furthermore, treatment with a first-generation antiseizure drug (ASD) fails in 30-40% of individuals because of their intolerable adverse effects. Over the past three decades, 20 newer- (second- and third-)generation ASDs with unique mechanisms of action and pharmacokinetic profiles have been introduced into clinical practice. This advent has expanded the therapeutic armamentarium of epilepsy and broadens the choices of ASDs to match the individual patient's characteristics. In recent years, research has been focused on defining the ASD of choice for different seizure types. In 2017, the International League Against Epilepsy published a new classification for seizure types and epilepsy syndrome. This classification has been of paramount importance to accurately classify the patient's seizure type(s) and prescribe the ASD that is appropriate. A year later, the American Academy of Neurology published a new guideline for ASD selection in adult and pediatric patients with new-onset and treatment-resistant epilepsy. The guideline primarily relied on studies that compare the first-generation and second-generation ASDs, with limited data for the efficacy of third-generation drugs. While researchers have been called for investigating those drugs in future research, epilepsy specialists may wish to share their personal experiences to support the treatment guidelines. Given the rapid advances in the development of ASDs in recent years and the continuous updates in definitions, classifications, and treatment guidelines for seizure types and epilepsy syndromes, this review aims to present a complete overview of the current state of the literature about the efficacy and tolerability of ASDs and provide guidance to clinicians about selecting appropriate ASDs for initial treatment of epilepsy according to different seizure types and epilepsy syndromes based on the current literature and recent US and UK practical guidelines.

Neuropharmacology of Antiseizure Drugs

BACKGROUND

Antiseizure drugs (ASDs) are the primary therapy for epilepsy, with more than 20 drugs introduced into clinical practice to date. These drugs are typically grouped by their mechanisms of action and therapeutic spectrum. This article aims to educate non-neurologists and medical students about the new frontiers in the pharmacology of ASDs and presents the current state of the literature on the efficacy and tolerability of these agents.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and evidence-based meta-analyses of ASD efficacy and tolerability as initial monotherapy for epileptic seizures and syndromes were identified in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Elsevier Clinical Pharmacology.

RESULTS

The choice of ASD varies primarily according to the seizure type. Practical guidelines for ASD selection in patients with new-onset and drug-resistant epilepsy were recently published. The guidelines have shown that the newer-generation drugs, which have unique mechanistic and pharmacokinetic properties, are better tolerated but have similar efficacy compared with the older drugs. Several ASDs are effective as first-line monotherapy in focal seizures, including lamotrigine, carbamazepine, phenytoin, levetiracetam, and zonisamide. Valproate remains the first-line drug for many patients with generalized and unclassified epilepsies. However, valproate should be avoided, if possible, in women of childbearing potential because of teratogenicity. Toxicity profile precludes several drugs from use as first-line treatment, for example, vigabatrin, felbamate, and rufinamide.

CONCLUSIONS

Antiseizure drugs have different pharmacologic profiles that should be considered when selecting and prescribing these agents for epilepsy. These include pharmacokinetic properties, propensity for drug-drug interactions, and adverse effects.

Survey on Antiepileptic Drug Therapy in Patients with Drug Resistant Epilepsy

Background and Purpose

Individualized anti-epileptic drug (AED) selection in patient with epilepsy is crucial. However, there is no unified opinion in treating patients with drug resistant epilepsy (DRE). This survey aimed to make a consolidate consensus with epileptologists’ perspectives of the treatment for Korean DRE patients by survey responses.

Methods

The survey was conducted with Korean epilepsy experts who have experience prescribing AEDs via e-mail. Survey questionnaires consisted of six items regarding prescription patterns and practical questions in treating patients with DRE in Korea. The research period was from February 2021 to March 2021.

Results

The survey response rate was 83.3% (90/108). Most (77.8%) of the responders are neurologists. The proportion of patients whose seizures were not controlled by the second AED was 26.9%. The proportion of patients who had taken five or more AEDs is 13.9%, and those who are currently taking five or more AEDs are 7.3%, of which 54.5% and 37.9% reported positive effects on additional AED, respectively. The majority (91.1%) of respondents answered that the mechanism of action was the top priority factor when adding AED. Regarding data priority, responders considered that expert opinion should have the top priority, followed by clinical experiences, reimbursement guidelines and clinical evidence. Responders gave 64.9 points (range from 0 to 100) about overall satisfaction on reimbursement system of Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service for AED.

Conclusions

This study on AED therapy for DRE patients is the first nationwide trial in Korean epilepsy experts. In five drug failure, the top priorities on AED selection are mechanism of action and expert opinion. These findings might help to achieve consensus and recognize the insight on optimal therapy of AED in DRE.

Efficacy of phenobarbital in treating elderly epilepsy patients in rural northeast China: A community-based intervention trial

OBJECT

To provide information on the characteristics of elderly epilepsy patients in rural Northeast China.

METHOD

Consecutive patients (aged >60) who were diagnosed with convulsive epilepsy in seven counties in Jilin Province, Northeast China, between January 2010 and December 2019 were included in the program and were divided into the EOE (early-onset epilepsy) group and the LOE (late-onset epilepsy) group. The patients were followed up once a month, and demographics and clinical data were recorded.

RESULT

There were 471 patients enrolled in this study, with 329 patients classified into the EOE group and 142 patients recruited into the LOE group. At baseline, the EOE group was younger than the LOE group (t=-9.007, p < 0.001). The most common etiologies for the EOE and LOE groups were post-trauma (4.0%, n=13) and stroke (9.2%, n=13). Elderly epilepsy patients had a good response to PB monotherapy, and no significant difference was found between the two groups (p > 0.05). EOE patients complained of more serious adverse events (p < 0.05), and drowsiness (52%) and ataxia (28%) were the most common adverse events reported by the EOE and LOE groups, respectively; however, more LOE patients were prone to withdrawal due to side effects (p = 0.036). A total of 63 patients withdrew from the study, and nonadherence was the commonest cause for withdrawal (56% in EOE and 50% in LOE). In the entire follow-up period, 112 patients (63 in the EOE group and 49 in the LOE group) died; the most common causes of death were stroke (n=44, 39%) and heart disease (n=36, 32%). The LOE group had a shorter survival time than the EOE group (χ²=42.216, p < 0.001). The LOE group (HR=3.47, 95% CI: 2.36-5.09) and higher seizure frequency (HR=1.72, 95% CI: 1.17-2.52) were the risk factors for death.

CONCLUSION

Elderly epilepsy patients had a good response to PB monotherapy. EOE patients complained of more serious adverse events, but more LOE patients were prone to withdrawal due to side effects. Nonadherence was the commonest cause of drug withdrawal, and it reflects the limited education regarding the impact of seizures and the differences in priorities of rural communities. EOE patients survive longer than LOE patients.

Treatment of epilepsy for people with Alzheimer's disease

BACKGROUND

Any type of seizure can be observed in Alzheimer's disease. Antiepileptic drugs seem to prevent the recurrence of epileptic seizures in most people with Alzheimer's disease. There are pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease, however there are no current systematic reviews to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of these treatments. This review aims to investigate these different modalities. This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review previously published in 2018.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions for the treatment of epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease (including sporadic Alzheimer's disease and dominantly inherited Alzheimer's disease).

SEARCH METHODS

For the latest update, on 3 August 2020 we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 31 July 2020). CRS Web includes randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials from PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialized Registers of Cochrane Review Groups, including Cochrane Epilepsy. In an effort to identify further published, unpublished and ongoing trials, we searched ongoing trials registers, reference lists and relevant conference proceedings; we also contacted trial authors and pharmaceutical companies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials investigating treatment for epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease, with the primary outcomes of proportion of participants with seizure freedom and proportion of participants experiencing adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, cross-checked the data for accuracy and assessed the methodological quality. We performed no meta-analyses due to there being limited available data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included one randomized controlled trial (RCT) on pharmacological interventions; the trial included 95 participants. No studies were found for non-pharmacological interventions. Concerning the proportion of participants with seizure freedom, no significant differences were found for the comparisons of levetiracetam versus lamotrigine (RR) 1.20, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.71; 67 participants; very low-certainty evidence), levetiracetam versus phenobarbital (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.19; 66 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or lamotrigine versus phenobarbital (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.02; 57 participants; very low-certainty evidence). It seemed that levetiracetam could improve cognition and lamotrigine could relieve depression, while phenobarbital and lamotrigine could worsen cognition, and levetiracetam and phenobarbital could worsen mood. The risk of bias relating to allocation, blinding and selective reporting was unclear. We judged the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes to be very low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review does not provide sufficient evidence to support levetiracetam, phenobarbital or lamotrigine for the treatment of epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease. Regarding efficacy and tolerability, no significant differences were found between levetiracetam, phenobarbital and lamotrigine. Large RCTs with a double-blind, parallel-group design are required to determine the efficacy and tolerability of treatment for epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease.

Immediate antiepileptic drug treatment, versus placebo, deferred, or no treatment for first unprovoked seizure

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the Cochrane review previously published in 2016. There is considerable disagreement about the risk of recurrence following a first unprovoked epileptic seizure. A decision about whether to start antiepileptic drug treatment following a first seizure should be informed by information on the size of any reduction in risk of future seizures, the impact on long-term seizure remission, and the risk of adverse effects.

OBJECTIVES

To review the probability of seizure recurrence, seizure remission, mortality, and adverse effects of antiepileptic drug (AED) treatment given immediately after the first seizure compared to controls (placebo, deferred treatment, or no treatment) in children and adults.

SEARCH METHODS

For the latest update, we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to May 24, 2019) on 28 May 2019. There were no language restrictions. The Cochrane Register of Studies includes the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and randomised or quasi-randomised, controlled trials from Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs that could be blinded or unblinded. People of any age with a first unprovoked seizure of any type. Included studies compared participants receiving immediate antiepileptic treatment versus those receiving deferred treatment, those assigned to placebo, and those untreated.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the studies identified by the search strategy for inclusion in the review and extracted data. The certainty of the evidence for the outcomes was classified in four categories according to the GRADE approach. Dichotomous outcomes were expressed as Risk Ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Time-to-event outcomes were expressed as Hazard Ratios (HR) with 95% CI. Only one trial used a double-blind design, and the two largest studies were unblinded. Most of the recurrences were generalised tonic-clonic seizures, a major type of seizures that is easily recognised, which should reduce the risk of outcome reporting bias.

MAIN RESULTS

After exclusion of irrelevant papers, six studies (eleven reports) were selected for inclusion. Individual participant data were available from the two largest studies for meta-analysis. Selection bias and attrition bias could not be excluded within the four smaller studies, but the two largest studies reported attrition rates and adequate methods of randomisation and allocation concealment. Only one small trial used a double-blind design and the other trials were unblinded; however, most of the recurrences were generalised tonic-clonic seizures, a type of seizure that is easily recognisable. Compared to controls, participants randomised to immediate treatment had a lower probability of relapse at one year (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.58; 6 studies, 1634 participants; high-certainty evidence), at five years (RR 0.78; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.89; 2 studies, 1212 participants; high-certainty evidence) and a higher probability of an immediate five-year remission (RR 1.25; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.54; 2 studies, 1212 participants; high-certainty evidence). However, there was no difference between immediate treatment and control in terms of five-year remission at any time (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.21; 2 studies, 1212 participants; high-certainty evidence). Antiepileptic drugs did not affect overall mortality after a first seizure (RR 1.16; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.95; 2 studies, 1212 participants; high-certainty evidence). Compared to deferred treatment, treatment of the first seizure was associated with a significantly higher risk of adverse events (RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.23 to 1.79; 2 studies, 1212 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We assessed the certainty of the evidence as moderate to low for the association of higher risk of adverse events when treatment of the first seizure was compared to no treatment or placebo, (RR 14.50, 95% CI 1.93 to 108.76; 1 study; 118 participants) and (RR 4.91, 95% CI 1.10 to 21.93; 1 study, 228 participants) respectively.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of the first unprovoked seizure reduces the risk of a subsequent seizure but does not affect the proportion of patients in remission in the long term. Antiepileptic drugs are associated with adverse events, and there is no evidence that they reduce mortality. In light of this review, the decision to start antiepileptic drug treatment following a first unprovoked seizure should be individualised and based on patient preference, clinical, legal, and sociocultural factors.

Cognitive dysfunction in Nigerian women with epilepsy on carbamazepine and levetiracetam monotherapy

BACKGROUND

This study aims to identify the determinants of cognitive dysfunction and compare the effect of CPZ and LTC on cognition in WWE.

METHODS

An observational study involving 87 consenting adult WWE aged between 16 and 40 years on LTC or CZP monotherapy. At enrollment, an interviewer-based questionnaire was used to obtain demographic and clinical information from participants. The diagnosis of epilepsy was mainly clinical and supported by electroencephalographic (EEG) features and classified based on recommendation by the 2017 International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE). Zung Self-Reporting Depression Scale (ZSRDS) was used to assess the mood of participants. The Community Screening Interview for Dementia (CSID) was used to assess various cognition domains. The National Hospital Seizure Severity Scale (NHS-3) was used to assess disease severity.

RESULTS

There were statistical differences between the CZP and LTC groups in all domains of cognition assessed except for orientation. The total CSID scores of the LTC group were 59.2 (4.9) as opposed to CZP group, 57.2 (5.0); p: .005. Those with focal onset seizures had lower median total CSID score (58; IQR: 54-62) when compared to those with generalized onset seizures (62; IQR: 58-62), p: .012. There was a significant correlation between ZSRD score and NHS-3 score; rho: 0.30, p: .007. Bivariate analysis shows statistically significant correlation between total CSID score and ZSRDS (rho: -0.65), BMI (rho: 0.22), and NHSS-3 score (rho: -0.36), respectively. However, the effect of AED on CSID scores was lost after multivariate quantile regression with only ZSRDS retaining significance.

CONCLUSION

Depression, seizure severity, type and structural etiology were associated with cognitive impairment among WWE. However, on regression model, only depression was statistically significant. The presence of more risks for cognitive impairment in the CZP group limits possible conclusion of LTC superiority.

Anti-seizure medications and efficacy against focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures: A systematic review with relevance for SUDEP prevention

We conducted a systematic review of anti-seizure medications (ASMs) and their efficacy for the control of focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (FBTCS). FBTCS, especially when nocturnal, are recognized as one of the major risk factors for Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy (SUDEP). We searched different online databases for all the randomized, double-blinded, and placebo-controlled clinical trials of ASMs that were FDA-approved after 1990 and that reported specifically on the reduction in FBTCS; when possible, this was compared to reduction in focal impaired awareness (FIA) seizures. The ASMs that yielded the most data (3 or more studies) were topiramate (TPM), followed by tiagabine (TGB), brivaracetam (BRV), and lamotrigine (LTG). TPM trials showed a reduction in FBTCS of 44.8% to 100% (4.5-99% over placebo); TGB 21.8% to 46.7% (21.8-61% over placebo); BRV 33.9% to 82.1% (11.6-57.4% over placebo); and LTG 55.2% (20.3-52% over placebo). Promising results, but with data from only one or two studies, were seen with cenobamate (18-59% efficacy above placebo), lacosamide (45.1-78.7%), levetiracetam (40.1-60.3%), oxcarbazepine (58.5-81.5%), and gabapentin (50-53.8%). Higher responses were often seen at higher doses, including at doses above those currently approved by the FDA. Results specific to nocturnal FBTCS were never reported for any ASM. Moreover, complete freedom from FBTCS specifically was very rarely reported, despite its relevance for SUDEP prevention. In conclusion, there are few data specifically comparing the efficacy of ASMs for prevention of FBTCS despite the known strong association of BTCS with SUDEP. This review was our attempt at filling a gap in the literature and calling for universal reporting of data specific to BTC seizure reduction in all future studies, preferably including specific reporting on nocturnal BTCS. This will help enable rational ASM selection to minimize BTC seizures and thereby decrease the risk of SUDEP.

Trends in prescribing patterns of antiepileptic drugs among older adult inpatients in a Brazilian tertiary center

BACKGROUND

Data on prescribing patterns of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) to older adult inpatients are limited.

OBJECTIVE

To assess changes in prescribing patterns of AEDs to older adult inpatients with late-onset epilepsy between 2009-2010 and 2015-2019, and to interpret any unexpected patterns over the 2015-2019 period.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥60 years with late-onset epilepsy from a tertiary center were selected. Demographic data, seizure characteristics and etiology, comorbidities, and comedications were analyzed, in addition to prescription regimens of inpatients taking AEDs to treat epilepsy. AED regimens were categorized into two groups: group 1 included appropriate AEDs (carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine, valproic acid, gabapentin, clobazam, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, topiramate, and lacosamide); and group 2 comprised suboptimal AEDs (phenytoin and phenobarbital). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for prescription of suboptimal AEDs.

RESULTS

134 patients were included in the study (mean age: 77.2±9.6 years). A significant reduction in the prescription of suboptimal AEDs (from 73.3 to 51.5%; p<0.001) was found; however, phenytoin remained the most commonly prescribed AED to older adult inpatients. We also found an increase in the prescription of lamotrigine (from 5.5 to 33.6%) and levetiracetam (from 0 to 29.1%) over time. Convulsive status epilepticus (SE) and acute symptomatic seizures associated with remote and progressive etiologies were risk factors for the prescription of suboptimal AEDs.

CONCLUSIONS

Phenytoin was the main suboptimal AED prescribed in our population, and convulsive SE and acute symptomatic seizures associated with some etiologies were independent risk factors for phenytoin prescription. These results suggest ongoing commitment to reducing the prescription of suboptimal AEDs, particularly phenytoin in Brazilian emergence rooms.

Alternatives to valproate in girls and women of childbearing potential with Idiopathic Generalized Epilepsies: state of the art and guidance for the clinician proposed by the Epilepsy and Gender Commission of the Italian League Against Epilepsy (LICE)

Following recent European Medication Agency restrictions on valproate (VPA) use in girls and women of childbearing potential (WOCP), the Commission on Epilepsy and Gender of the Italian League against Epilepsy integrated current literature and legislative data in order to provide clinicians with guidance on antiseizure medication (ASM) prescription for Idiopathic Generalized Epilepsies (IGEs) in this population, avoiding VPA. We reviewed the updated literature on ASMs and examined the teratogenicity of those showing efficacy in IGEs. For all relevant ASMs, we considered the indications for use and the pregnancy and contraception-related recommendations given in the Italian Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) and on the websites of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and other European Union (EU) countries' regulatory agencies. With the exception of absence seizures, the literature lacks high quality studies on ASMs in IGEs. In girls and WOCP, levetiracetam and lamotrigine should be considered the first-choice drugs in Generalized Tonic-Clonic Seizures Alone and in Juvenile Myoclonic Epilepsy, lamotrigine in Juvenile Absence Epilepsy, and ethosuximide in Childhood Absence Epilepsy. Although supported by the literature, several ASMs are off label, contraindicated or burdened by special warnings in pregnancy. Some discrepancies emerged between the various SmPC warnings for different brands of the same active principle. We provided a therapeutic algorithm for each IGE syndrome and highlighted the need for revised prescription rules, consistent with the latest literature data, uniformity of SmPC warnings for the same active principle, and more data on the efficacy of new ASMs in IGEs and their safety in pregnancy.

Reproductive health in patients with epilepsy

The aim of the present study was to review existing knowledge on the impact of epilepsy in reproductive health of both sexes. Extensive searches of relevant documentation published until February 2020 were retrieved from PubMed and Google Scholar literature in English or in other languages with an English abstract. In females, epilepsy may lead to estrogen and androgen level abnormalities. Women with epilepsy may develop Polycystic Ovaries Syndrome (PCOS), anovulatory cycles, and menstrual disorders. In men, epilepsy may cause sex hormone dysregulation and influence spermatogenesis. Males with epilepsy may also suffer from sexual dysfunction. Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) have adverse effects on peripheral endocrine glands, influence hormones' biosynthesis and protein binding, diminish the bioactivity of serum sex hormones, and lead to secondary endocrine disorders related to changes concerning body weight and insulin sensitivity. Valproic acid (VPA) was the first recognized AED to cause disturbances potentially due to metabolic changes and increasing weight. Women taking VPA may develop PCOS, while men may have sperm abnormalities and/or sexual dysfunction. Liver enzyme inducing AEDs may also cause menstrual and sexual disorders in women and sexual dysfunction in men. Newer AEDs are much safer but studies still suggest reduced sexuality and erectile dysfunction.

Cognitive disorders in epilepsy II: Clinical targets, indications and selection of test instruments

This is the second of two narrative reviews on cognitive disorders in epilepsy (companion manuscript: Cognitive disorders in epilepsy I: Clinical experience, real-world evidence and recommendations). Its focus is on the clinical targets, indications, and the selection of neuropsychological test instruments. Cognitive assessment has become an essential tool for the diagnosis and outcome control in the clinical management of epilepsy. The diagnostics of basic and higher brain functions can provide valuable information on lateralized and localized brain dysfunctions associated with epilepsy, its underlying pathologies and treatment. In addition to the detection or verification of deficits, neuropsychology reveals the patient's cognitive strengths and, thus, information about the patient reserve capacities for functional restitution and compensation. Neuropsychology is an integral part of diagnostic evaluations mainly in the context of epilepsy surgery to avoid new or additional damage to preexisting neurocognitive impairments. In addition and increasingly, neuropsychology is being used as a tool for monitoring of the disease and its underlying pathologies, and it is suited for the quality and outcome control of pharmacological or other non-invasive medical intervention. This narrative review summarizes the present state of neuropsychological assessments in epilepsy, reveals diagnostic gaps, and shows the great need for education, homogenization, translation and standardization of instruments.

Long-term outcomes after surgery for catastrophic epilepsy in infants: institutional experience and review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

Uncontrolled epilepsy is associated with serious deleterious effects on the neurological development of infants and has been described as "catastrophic epilepsy." Recently, there has been increased emphasis on early surgical interventions to preserve or rescue neurodevelopmental outcomes in infants with early intractable epilepsy. The enthusiasm for early treatments is often tempered by concerns regarding the morbidity of neurosurgical procedures in very young patients. Here, the authors report outcomes following the surgical management of infants (younger than 1 year).

METHODS

The authors performed a retrospective review of patients younger than 1 year of age who underwent surgery for epilepsy at Miami (Nicklaus) Children's Hospital and Jackson Memorial Hospital between 1994 and 2018. Patient demographics, including the type of interventions, were recorded. Seizure outcomes (at last follow-up and at 1 year postoperatively) as well as complications are reported.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight infants (median age 5.9 months) underwent a spectrum of surgical interventions, including hemispherectomy (n = 17), focal resection (n = 13), and multilobe resections (n = 8), with a mean follow-up duration of 9.1 years. Hemimegalencephaly and cortical dysplasia were the most commonly encountered pathologies. Surgery for catastrophic epilepsy resulted in complete resolution of seizures in 68% (n = 26) of patients, and 76% (n = 29) had a greater than 90% reduction in seizure frequency. Overall mortality and morbidity were 0% and 10%, respectively. The latter included infections (n = 2), infarct (n = 1), and immediate reoperation for seizures (n = 1).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical intervention for catastrophic epilepsy in infants remains safe, efficacious, and durable. The authors' work provides the longest follow-up of such a series on infants to date and compares favorably with previously published series.

Receptors and Channels Possibly Mediating the Effects of Phytocannabinoids on Seizures and Epilepsy

Epilepsy contributes to approximately 1% of the global disease burden. By affecting especially young children as well as older persons of all social and racial variety, epilepsy is a present disorder worldwide. Currently, only 65% of epileptic patients can be successfully treated with antiepileptic drugs. For this reason, alternative medicine receives more attention. Cannabis has been cultivated for over 6000 years to treat pain and insomnia and used since the 19th century to suppress epileptic seizures. The two best described phytocannabinoids, (−)-trans-Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) are claimed to have positive effects on different neurological as well as neurodegenerative diseases, including epilepsy. There are different cannabinoids which act through different types of receptors and channels, including the cannabinoid receptor 1 and 2 (CB₁, CB₂), G protein-coupled receptor 55 (GPR55) and 18 (GPR18), opioid receptor µ and δ, transient receptor potential vanilloid type 1 (TRPV1) and 2 (TRPV2), type A γ-aminobutyric acid receptor (GABA_AR) and voltage-gated sodium channels (VGSC). The mechanisms and importance of the interaction between phytocannabinoids and their different sites of action regarding epileptic seizures and their clinical value are described in this review.

Epilepsy and aging

The intersection of epilepsy and aging has broad, significant implications. Substantial increases in seizures occur both in the elderly population, who are at a higher risk of developing new-onset epilepsy, and in those with chronic epilepsy who become aged. There are notable gaps in our understanding of aging and epilepsy at the basic and practical levels, which have important consequences. We are in the early stages of understanding the complex relationships between epilepsy and other age-related brain diseases such as stroke, dementia, traumatic brain injury (TBI), and cancer. Furthermore, the clinician must recognize that the presentation and treatment of epilepsy in the elderly are different from those of younger populations. Given the developing awareness of the problem and the capabilities of contemporary, multidisciplinary approaches to advance understanding about the biology of aging and epilepsy, it is reasonable to expect that we will unravel some of the intricacies of epilepsy in the elderly; it is also reasonable to expect that these gains will lead to further improvements in our understanding and treatment of epilepsy for all age groups.

Position paper of a German interdisciplinary round table on future designs of trials on adjunctive treatment with antiseizure drugs

PURPOSE

Current trials on adjunctive treatment with antiseizure drugs often do not reveal results which are relevant for clinical practice.

METHOD

Therefore, an interdisciplinary group of German experts discussed a new framework for future antiseizure drug (ASD) trials in adults. This group included members of the executive board of the German Society of Epileptology, of the German institutes for health technology assessment (HTA), of patient organizations and of drug manufacturers. Agreement was reached by consensus decision making after intensive discussion of the findings of a narrative review of the current literature.

RESULTS

The group jointly recommends that ASD trials in adults should be based on and include relevant patient groups, e.g. elderly patients and patients with relevant co-morbidities, should adopt a study duration of at least 12 months, should avoid placebo arms, should include active comparators of clinical relevance, may be designed as open label trials with blinded outcome measurements, should focus on patient relevant outcomes that reflect the impact of benefits and harms of treatments on daily living, such as seizure freedom and seizure severity as well as retention rate, functional outcomes and quality of life as compound measures, and should avoid arbitrary and non-sensitive primary endpoints such as dichotomized changes in seizure frequency.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper focused on improved head-to-head trials on adjunctive treatment with antiseizure drugs. The group welcomes any further work and discussion to enhance future studies which can be applied to the entire spectrum of potentially meaningful study populations and outcomes.

Patterns of anti-seizure medication (ASM) use in pediatric patients with surgically managed epilepsy: A retrospective review of data from Boston Children's Hospital

OBJECT

Up to 30 % of patients with epilepsy are medically intractable, defined as persistent seizures despite 2 or more appropriate anti-seizure medications (ASMs) at therapeutic doses. Such patients require non-pharmacologic management that often includes epilepsy surgery. This paper aims to assess the pre-operative ASM use patterns of patients who were surgically managed.

METHODS

Retrospective review of children who underwent surgery for epilepsy at Boston Children's Hospital between January 2010 and December 2014 were performed. Patient demographics, covariates, etiology, surgery type and ASM use patterns were assessed. Patient characteristics were displayed using descriptive statistics, correlation between ASM use and patient covariates were calculated with the Spearman coefficient, and univariate analysis was performed with Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

141 consecutive records of children were reviewed. All underwent one of four surgical procedures: focal resection, hemispherectomy, corpus callosotomy, or magnetic resonance-guided laser interstitial thermal therapy (MRgLITT). In this cohort, at the time of surgical evaluation the average number of pre-operative ASMs trialed was 5.2 and the average number of current ASMs was 2.6. The mean age of seizure onset was 4.4 years, the mean age at the time of surgery was 11.1 years, and the average time from seizure onset to surgery was 6.7 years. The number of total pre-operative ASMs was significantly related to longer time to surgery. Focal resection was associated with decreased ASM use and corpus callosotomy was associated with increased ASM use. Patients with radiographic findings that confer better surgical candidacy did not use fewer pre-operative ASMs or undergo earlier surgical referral.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite guidelines that encourage early surgical referral and evaluation for drug-resistant epilepsy, a delay in surgical referral was seen in clinical practice, as evidenced by an average trial of 5.2 ASMs prior to referral, and an average lag of 6.7 years between time of seizure onset and surgery. Increased medication trials was directly correlated with increased time to definitive surgery. Improved education amongst neurologists for earlier surgical referral is required, especially for pathologies associated with good surgical outcome.

Update on Antiepileptic Drugs 2019

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article is an update from the article on antiepileptic drug (AED) therapy published in the last Continuum issue on epilepsy and is intended to cover the vast majority of agents currently available to the neurologist in the management of patients with epilepsy. Treatment of epilepsy starts with AED monotherapy. Knowledge of the spectrum of efficacy, clinical pharmacology, and modes of use for individual AEDs is essential for optimal treatment for epilepsy. This article addresses AEDs individually, focusing on key pharmacokinetic characteristics, indications, and modes of use.

RECENT FINDINGS

Since the previous version of this article was published, three new AEDs, brivaracetam, cannabidiol, and stiripentol, have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and ezogabine was removed from the market because of decreased use as a result of bluish skin pigmentation and concern over potential retinal toxicity.Older AEDs are effective but have tolerability and pharmacokinetic disadvantages. Several newer AEDs have undergone comparative trials demonstrating efficacy equal to and tolerability at least equal to or better than older AEDs as first-line therapy. The list includes lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, levetiracetam, topiramate, zonisamide, and lacosamide. Pregabalin was found to be less effective than lamotrigine. Lacosamide, pregabalin, and eslicarbazepine have undergone successful trials of conversion to monotherapy. Other newer AEDs with a variety of mechanisms of action are suitable for adjunctive therapy. Most recently, the FDA adopted a policy that a drug's efficacy as adjunctive therapy in adults can be extrapolated to efficacy in monotherapy. In addition, efficacy in adults can be extrapolated for efficacy in children 4 years of age and older. Both extrapolations require data demonstrating that an AED has equivalent pharmacokinetics between its original approved use and its extrapolated use. In addition, the safety of the drug in pediatric patients has to be demonstrated in clinical studies that can be open label. Rational AED combinations should avoid AEDs with unfavorable pharmacokinetic interactions or pharmacodynamic interactions related to mechanism of action.

SUMMARY

Knowledge of AED pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and tolerability profiles facilitates the choice of appropriate AED therapy for patients with epilepsy.

Treatment of Women With Epilepsy

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article provides the latest information to guide practitioners in counseling and treating women with epilepsy.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is an increasing body of literature on the multidirectional effects of sex hormones on seizure frequency and severity and of seizures altering areas of the brain involved in neuroendocrine function. Ongoing pregnancy outcome data from pregnancy registries and meta-analysis of observational studies have provided key information on the safety of using antiseizure medications during pregnancy and the risk to the fetus.

SUMMARY

In treating and counseling women with epilepsy from puberty to menopause, it is important to understand the complex interactions of sex hormones, seizures, and antiseizure medications on reproductive health and pregnancy outcomes.

Lessons from the Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial

Convulsive status epilepticus (SE) is a relatively common emergency condition affecting individuals of all ages. The primary goal of treatment is prompt termination of seizures. Where first-line treatment with benzodiazepine has failed to achieve this, a condition known as established SE (ESE), there is uncertainty about which agent to use next. The Established Status Epilepticus Treatment Trial (ESETT) is a 3-arm (valproate (VPA), fosphenytoin (FOS), levetiracetam (LEV)), phase III, double-blind randomized comparative effectiveness study in patients aged 2 years and above with established convulsive SE. Enrollment was completed in January 2019, and the results are expected later this year. We discuss lessons learnt during the conduct of the study in relation to the following: ethical considerations; trial design and practical implementation in emergency settings, including pediatric and adult populations; quality assurance; and outcome determination where treating emergency clinicians may lack specialist expertise. We consider that the ESETT is already informing both clinical practice and future trial design. This article is part of the Special Issue "Proceedings of the 7th London-Innsbruck Colloquium on Status Epilepticus and Acute Seizures".

Review of purchases of unapproved medications by the Veterans Health Administration

PURPOSE

Many medications that were marketed prior to 1962 but lack Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval are prescribed in the United States. Usage patterns of these "unapproved medications" are poorly elucidated, which is concerning due to potential lack of data on safety and efficacy. The purpose of this project was to characterize purchases of unapproved medications within the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) by type, frequency, and cost.

METHODS

VHA purchasing databases were used to create a list of all products with National Drug Codes (NDCs) purchased nationwide in fiscal year 2016 (FY16). This list was compared to FDA databases to identify unapproved prescription medications. For each identified combination of active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) and route of administration ("API/route combination"), numbers of packages purchased and associated costs were added.

RESULTS

VHA pharmacy purchasing records contained 3,299 unapproved products with NDCs in FY16. After excluding equipment, nutrition products, compounding ingredients, nonmedication products, and duplicate NDCs, there were 600 unique NDCs associated with 130 distinct API/route combinations. The most commonly acquired product was prescription sodium fluoride dental paste (350,775 packages). The greatest pharmaceutical expenditure was for sodium hyaluronate injection ($24.5 million). Unapproved products accounted for less than 1% of overall VHA pharmacy purchasing in FY16.

CONCLUSION

VHA purchased many unapproved prescription products in FY16 but is taking action to address use of such products in consideration of safety and efficacy data and available alternatives.

Sexual dysfunction in people with epilepsy

Sexual dysfunction is a common comorbidity in people with epilepsy (PWE) that adversely affects their quality of life. Nearly one-half of men and women with epilepsy have sexual dysfunction, but in the majority, this often goes unnoticed. The wide variation in the reported prevalence of sexual dysfunction in PWE is due to the significant heterogeneity among the studies with regard to patient population, type and severity of epilepsy, number and type of antiseizure drugs (ASDs) used, and the tools used for assessing sexual dysfunction. Generally, patients with uncontrolled epilepsy, longer duration of epilepsy, focal epilepsy, higher seizure frequency, and those receiving enzyme-inducing and multiple ASDs are more likely to have sexual dysfunction. Women generally have dysfunction in the domains of desire, while males usually have arousal disorders such as erectile dysfunction and premature ejaculation. There is limited evidence to indicate that sexual function improves in patients rendered seizure-free following epilepsy surgery. Multiple mechanisms including direct effects of epilepsy, effects of ASDs, and psychosocial factors contribute to sexual dysfunction in epilepsy. Circumstantial evidence indicates that seizures and interictal epileptiform discharges can directly affect the hypothalamic-pituitary axis as well as production of gonadal steroids. Enzyme-inducing ASDs cause sexual dysfunction by affecting the metabolism of gonadal steroids. Limited data suggest that newer ASDs including oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, and levetiracetam cause no or minimal sexual dysfunction. Depression and anxiety significantly contribute to sexual dysfunction in PWE. A multipronged and multidisciplinary approach is essential for optimizing the sexual functions. Every effort should be made to identify and treat reversible causes including changing to nonenzyme-inducing ASDs and to provide symptomatic relief. Large, prospective studies are required to improve our understanding on prevalence and mechanisms of sexual dysfunction in PWE.

Evaluation of sodium valproate loaded nanoparticles in acute and chronic pentylenetetrazole induced seizure models

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Efficacy of sodium valproate in epilepsy is limited by its poor blood brain barrier penetration and side effects. Nanoparticles may offer a better drug delivery system to overcome these limitations. This study evaluated the efficacy of sodium valproate encapsulated in nanoparticles in pentylenetetrazole (PTZ) induced acute and kindling models of seizures in male Wistar rats.

METHODS

Poly lactic-co-glycolic acid (PLGA) based, polysorbate 80 stabilized sodium valproate loaded nanoparticles (nano sodium valproate) and rhodamine loaded nanoparticles (RLN) were formulated by double emulsion- solvent evaporation method and characterized for their size, shape, zeta potential and drug loading percentage. RLN was used to demonstrate blood brain barrier (BBB) permeability of nanoparticles. Serum drug levels were estimated using high performance liquid chromatography. The efficacy of standard sodium valproate (300 mg/kg) and nano sodium valproate (∼300, ∼150 and ∼75 mg/kg of sodium valproate) were evaluated in experimental animal models of seizures along with their effects on behavioral and oxidative stress parameters. Drugs were administered 60 min before PTZ in acute model. In the kindling model, drugs were administered every day while PTZ was administered on alternate days 60 min after drug administration. All the study drugs/compounds were administered intraperitoneally.

RESULTS

RLN were observed to be clustered in cortex which implied that the nanoparticles crossed BBB. Both standard sodium valproate and nano sodium valproate reached therapeutic serum level at 15 min and 1 h, but were undetectable in serum at 24 h. In acute PTZ (60 mg/kg) model, nano sodium valproate (∼300 mg/kg of sodium valproate) and standard sodium valproate showed protection against seizures till 6 h and 4 h, respectively. There were significant behavioral impairment and oxidative stress with standard sodium valproate in acute model as compared to nano sodium valproate at 6 h. In kindling model, induced with PTZ (30 mg/kg, every alternate day for 42 days), complete protection from seizures was observed with nano sodium valproate (∼150 mg/kg and ∼75 mg/kg of sodium valproate) and standard sodium valproate (300 mg/kg). Similarly, significant protection from behavioral impairment and oxidative stress was observed with standard sodium valproate and nano sodium valproate as compared to PTZ.

CONCLUSION

When compared to conventional therapy, nano sodium valproate showed protection from seizures at reduced doses and for a longer duration in animal models of epilepsy. This study suggests the potential of nano sodium valproate in the treatment of epilepsy.

Phenobarbitone versus phenytoin monotherapy for epilepsy: an individual participant data review

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2001, and last updated in 2013. This review is one in a series of Cochrane Reviews investigating pair-wise monotherapy comparisons.Epilepsy is a common neurological condition in which abnormal electrical discharges from the brain cause recurrent unprovoked seizures. It is believed that with effective drug treatment, up to 70% of individuals with active epilepsy have the potential to become seizure-free and go into long-term remission shortly after starting drug therapy with a single antiepileptic drug in monotherapy.Worldwide, particularly in the developing world, phenytoin and phenobarbitone are commonly used antiepileptic drugs, primarily because they are inexpensive. The aim of this review is to summarise data from existing trials comparing phenytoin and phenobarbitone.

OBJECTIVES

To review the time to treatment failure, remission and first seizure with phenobarbitone compared with phenytoin when used as monotherapy in people with focal onset seizures (simple or complex focal and secondarily generalised), or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).

SEARCH METHODS

For the latest update, we searched the following databases on 21 August 2018: the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), which includes Cochrane Epilepsy's Specialized Register and CENTRAL; MEDLINE; the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov); and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We handsearched relevant journals and contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators, and experts in the field.  SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing monotherapy with either phenobarbitone or phenytoin in children or adults with focal onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual participant data (IPD), review. Our primary outcome was time to treatment failure. Our secondary outcomes were time to first seizure post-randomisation, time to six-month remission and time to 12-month remission. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models to obtain trial-specific estimates of hazard ratios (HRs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), using the generic inverse variance method to obtain the overall pooled HR and 95% CI.

MAIN RESULTS

Individual participant data were obtained for five studies, which recruited a total of 635 participants, representing 80% of 798 individuals from all seven identified eligible trials. For remission outcomes, an HR of less than 1 indicates an advantage for phenytoin and for first seizure and treatment failure outcomes an HR of less than 1 indicates an advantage for phenobarbitone.Results for the primary outcome of the review were: time to treatment failure for any reason related to treatment (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type for 499 participants: 1.61, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.12, low-certainty evidence), time to treatment failure due to adverse events (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type for 499 participants: 1.99, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.87, low-certainty evidence), time to treatment failure due to lack of efficacy (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type for 499 participants: 1.87, 95% CI 1.32 to 2.66, moderate-certainty evidence), showing a statistically significant advantage for phenytoin compared to phenobarbitone.For our secondary outcomes, we did not find any statistically significant differences between phenytoin and phenobarbitone: time to first seizure post-randomisation (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type for 624 participants: 0.85, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.06, moderate-certainty evidence), time to 12-month remission (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type for 588 participants: 0.90, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.19, moderate-certainty evidence), and time to six-month remission pooled HR adjusted for seizure type for 588 participants: 0.91, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.15, moderate-certainty evidence).For individuals with focal onset seizures (73% of individuals contributing to analysis), numerical results were similar and conclusions the same as for analyses of all individuals and for individuals with generalised onset seizures (27% of individuals contributing to analysis), results were imprecise and no clear differences between the drugs were observed.Several confounding factors, most notably the differences in design of the trials with respect to blinding, were likely to have impacted on the results of the primary outcome 'time to treatment failure', and in turn, the treatment failure rates may have impacted on the secondary efficacy outcomes of time to first seizure and time to 12-month and six-month remission.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-certainty evidence from this review suggests that phenytoin may be a more effective drug than phenobarbitone in terms of treatment retention (treatment failures due to lack of efficacy or adverse events or both). Moderate-certainty evidence from this review also indicates no differences between the drugs in terms of time to seizure recurrence and seizure remission.However, the trials contributing to the analyses had methodological inadequacies and methodological design differences that may have impacted upon the results of this review. Therefore, we do not suggest that results of this review alone should form the basis of a treatment choice for a patient with newly onset seizures. We recommend that future trials should be designed to the highest quality possible with consideration of masking, choice of population, classification of seizure type, duration of follow-up, choice of outcomes and analysis, and presentation of results.

Carbamazepine versus phenytoin monotherapy for epilepsy: an individual participant data review

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2002 and last updated in 2017. This review is one in a series of Cochrane Reviews investigating pair-wise monotherapy comparisons.Epilepsy is a common neurological condition in which abnormal electrical discharges from the brain cause recurrent unprovoked seizures. It is believed that with effective drug treatment, up to 70% of individuals with active epilepsy have the potential to become seizure-free and go into long-term remission shortly after starting drug therapy with a single antiepileptic drug in monotherapy.Worldwide, carbamazepine and phenytoin are commonly-used broad spectrum antiepileptic drugs, suitable for most epileptic seizure types. Carbamazepine is a current first-line treatment for focal onset seizures in the USA and Europe. Phenytoin is no longer considered a first-line treatment, due to concerns over adverse events associated with its use, but the drug is still commonly used in low- to middle-income countries because of its low cost. No consistent differences in efficacy have been found between carbamazepine and phenytoin in individual trials; however, the confidence intervals generated by these trials are wide, and therefore, synthesising the data of the individual trials may show differences in efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

To review the time to treatment failure, remission and first seizure with carbamazepine compared with phenytoin when used as monotherapy in people with focal onset seizures (simple or complex focal and secondarily generalised), or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).

SEARCH METHODS

For the latest update, we searched the following databases on 13 August 2018: the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), which includes the Cochrane Epilepsy's Specialised Register and CENTRAL; MEDLINE; the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov); and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We handsearched relevant journals and contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators, and experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing monotherapy with either carbamazepine or phenytoin in children or adults with focal onset seizures or generalised onset (tonic-clonic) seizures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual participant data (IPD) review. Our primary outcome was time to treatment failure. Our secondary outcomes were time to first seizure post-randomisation, time to six-month remission, time to 12-month remission, and incidence of adverse events. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models to obtain trial-specific estimates of hazard ratios (HRs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), using the generic inverse variance method to obtain the overall pooled HR and 95% CI.

MAIN RESULTS

IPD were available for 595 participants out of 1102 eligible individuals, from four out of 11 trials (i.e. 54% of the potential data). For remission outcomes, a HR greater than 1 indicates an advantage for phenytoin; and for first seizure and withdrawal outcomes, a HR greater than 1 indicates an advantage for carbamazepine. Most participants included in analysis (78%) were classified as experiencing focal onset seizures at baseline and only 22% were classified as experiencing generalised onset seizures; the results of this review are therefore mainly applicable to individuals with focal onset seizures.Results for the primary outcome of the review were: time to treatment failure for any reason related to treatment (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type for 546 participants: 0.94, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.26, moderate-certainty evidence); time to treatment failure due to lack of efficacy (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type for 546 participants: 0.99, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.41, moderate-certainty evidence); both showing no clear difference between the drugs and time to treatment failure due to adverse events (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type for 546 participants: 1.27, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.86, moderate-certainty evidence), showing that treatment failure due to adverse events may occur earlier on carbamazepine than phenytoin, but we cannot rule out a slight advantage to carbamazepine or no difference between the drugs.For our secondary outcomes (pooled HRs adjusted for seizure type), we did not find any clear differences between carbamazepine and phenytoin: time to first seizure post-randomisation (582 participants): 1.15, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.40, moderate-certainty evidence); time to 12-month remission (551 participants): 1.00, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.26, moderate-certainty evidence); and time to six-month remission (551 participants): 0.90, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.12, moderate-certainty evidence).For all outcomes, results for individuals with focal onset seizures were similar to overall results (moderate-certainty evidence), and results for the small subgroup of individuals with generalised onset seizures were imprecise, so we cannot rule out an advantage to either drug, or no difference between drugs (low-certainty evidence). There was also evidence that misclassification of seizure type may have confounded the results of this review, particularly for the outcome 'time to treatment failure'. Heterogeneity was present in analysis of 'time to first seizure' for individuals with generalised onset seizures, which could not be explained by subgroup analysis or sensitivity analyses.Limited information was available about adverse events in the trials and we could not compare the rates of adverse events between carbamazepine and phenytoin. Some adverse events reported on both drugs were abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting, drowsiness, motor and cognitive disturbances, dysmorphic side effects (such as rash).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-certainty evidence provided by this systematic review does not show any differences between carbamazepine and phenytoin in terms of effectiveness (retention) or efficacy (seizure recurrence and seizure remission) for individuals with focal onset or generalised onset seizures.However, some of the trials contributing to the analyses had methodological inadequacies and inconsistencies, which may have had an impact on the results of this review. We therefore do not suggest that results of this review alone should form the basis of a treatment choice for a person with newly-onset seizures. We did not find any evidence to support or refute current treatment policies. We implore that future trials be designed to the highest quality possible, with consideration of masking, choice of population, classification of seizure type, duration of follow-up, choice of outcomes and analysis, and presentation of results.

Clinical opinion: Earlier employment of polytherapy in sequential pharmacotherapy of epilepsy

Modern pharmacotherapy for epilepsy consists of orderly, sequential drug trials, in which antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are chosen under the concept of individual patient-oriented (or - tailored) pharmacotherapy. Although monotherapy has been established as the preferred mode of AEDs therapy in both newly diagnosed and drug resistant epilepsies, there are still lack of evidence to favor either monotherapy or polytherapy in epilepsy, which has generated continuing controversies on the preferred mode of pharmacotherapy. However, each mode of pharmacotherapy may have both advantages and disadvantages, which are different and variable related to individual case scenario. We conducted a brief comparative overview between monotherapy and polytherapy to provide clues for earlier employment of polytherapy in each steps of sequential drug trials. Previous claims about the advantages of monotherapy over polytherapy are not supported but gradually losing its ground by the introduction of a large number of drugs carrying pharmacological advantages for combination therapy. Current evidence stresses the importance of combining drugs having synergistic interactions for better outcome of polytherapy, which has not been considered in previous clinical investigations comparing monotherapy and polytherapy. It is likely that a significant improvement in the outcome of current AEDs therapy is feasible by earlier employment of polytherapy as well as identification of combination drug regimens carrying synergistic interactions. At present, lamotrigine(LTG) and valproate(VPA) combination regimen is the only well documented synergistic regimen, but there are a long-list of candidate regimens requiring future trials in appropriate designs.

Pharmacotherapy for Focal Seizures in Children and Adolescents

Focal-onset seizures are among the most common forms of seizures in children and adolescents and can be caused by a wide diversity of acquired or genetic etiologies. Despite the increasing array of antiseizure drugs available, treatment of focal-onset seizures in this population remains problematic, with as many as one-third of children having seizures refractory to medications. This review discusses contemporary concepts in focal seizure classification and pathophysiology and describes the antiseizure medications most commonly chosen for this age group. As antiseizure drug efficacy is comparable in children and adults, here we focus on pharmacokinetic aspects, drug-drug interactions, and side effect profiles. Finally, we provide some suggestions for choosing the optimal medication for the appropriate patient.

The safety of treating newly diagnosed epilepsy

INTRODUCTION

Epilepsy is a serious chronic neurological disorder manifested by an enduring symptomatic predisposition to seizures. Newly diagnosed individuals face increased morbidity, mortality, and socioeconomic costs. Anti-epileptic drug therapy is the treatment usually prescribed, which has efficacy in seizure control and mitigating long-term mortality.

AREAS COVERED

Safety of anti-epileptic drug therapy in adults with a focus in newly diagnosed patients. Areas covered include the most commonly experienced adverse drug effects, as well as those with the highest impacts on drug tolerability, quality of life, morbidity and mortality. Evidence was also reviewed to identify clinical strategies to improve the safety of anti-epileptic drug therapy.

EXPERT OPINION

Anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) are mostly effective and well tolerated. However, a lack of standardised reporting of adverse drug effects in trials and in clinical practice provides an obstacle for evaluation of which adverse drug effects need to be prioritised in management. Improvement in the reporting of cognitive and other effects, as well as improved precision medicine and pharmacogenomics to target the incidence of high-mortality idiosyncratic reactions, will help to reduce the harm of AEDs in people newly diagnosed with epilepsy.