Antiepileptic monotherapy in newly diagnosed focal epilepsy. A network meta-analysis

Current challenges in focal epilepsy treatment: An Italian Delphi consensus

BACKGROUND

Epilepsy, a globally prevalent neurological condition, presents distinct challenges in management, particularly for focal-onset types. This study aimed at addressing the current challenges and perspectives in focal epilepsy management, with focus on the Italian reality.

METHODS

Using the Delphi methodology, this research collected and analyzed the level of consensus of a panel of Italian epilepsy experts on key aspects of focal epilepsy care. Areas of focus included patient flow, treatment pathways, controlled versus uncontrolled epilepsy, follow-up protocols, and the relevance of patient-reported outcomes (PROs). This method allowed for a comprehensive assessment of consensus and divergences in clinical opinions and practices.

RESULTS

The study achieved consensus on 23 out of 26 statements, with three items failing to reach a consensus. There was strong agreement on the importance of timely intervention, individualized treatment plans, regular follow-ups at Epilepsy Centers, and the role of PROs in clinical practice. In cases of uncontrolled focal epilepsy, there was a clear inclination to pursue alternative treatment options following the failure of two previous therapies. Divergent views were evident on the inclusion of epilepsy surgery in treatment for uncontrolled epilepsy and the routine necessity of EEG evaluations in follow-ups. Other key findings included concerns about the lack of pediatric-specific research limiting current therapeutic options in this patient population, insufficient attention to the transition from pediatric to adult care, and need for improved communication. The results highlighted the complexities in managing epilepsy, with broad consensus on patient care aspects, yet notable divergences in specific treatment and management approaches.

CONCLUSION

The study offered valuable insights into the current state and complexities of managing focal-onset epilepsy. It highlighted many deficiencies in the therapeutic pathway of focal-onset epilepsy in the Italian reality, while it also underscored the importance of patient-centric care, the necessity of early and appropriate intervention, and individualized treatment approaches. The findings also called for continued research, policy development, and healthcare system improvements to enhance epilepsy management, highlighting the ongoing need for tailored healthcare solutions in this evolving field.

Diagnosing epileptic seizures in patients with Alzheimer's disease and deciding on the appropriate treatment plan

INTRODUCTION

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the predominant cause of dementia and a significant contributor to morbidity among the elderly. Patients diagnosed with AD face an increased risk of epileptic seizures.

AREAS COVERED

Herein, the authors review the challenges in the diagnosis of seizures in patients with AD, the risks of seizures related to medications used in AD and the pharmacological treatment of seizures in AD. The authors also provide the reader with their expert opinion on the subject matter and future perspectives.

EXPERT OPINION

Healthcare professionals should maintain a vigilant approach to suspecting seizures in AD patients. Acute symptomatic seizures triggered by metabolic disturbances, infections, toxins, or drug-related factors often have a low risk of recurrence. In such cases, addressing the underlying cause may suffice without initiating antiseizure medications (ASMs). However, unprovoked seizures in certain AD patients carry a higher risk of recurrence over time, warranting the use of ASMs. Although data is limited, both lamotrigine and levetiracetam appear to be reasonable choices for controlling seizures in elderly AD patients. Decisions should be informed by the best available evidence, the treating physician's clinical experience, and the patient's preferences.

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.

Research Status, Synthesis and Clinical Application of Antiepileptic Drugs

According to the 2017 ILAE's official definition, epilepsy is a slow brain disease state characterized by recurrent episodes. Due to information released by ILAE in 2017, it can be divided into four types, including focal epilepsy, generalized epilepsy, combined generalized, and focal epilepsy, and unknown epilepsy. Since 1989, 24 new antiepileptic drugs have been approved to treat different types of epilepsy. Besides, there are a variety of antiepileptic medications under clinical monitoring. These novel antiepileptic drugs have plenty of advantages. Over the past 33 years, there have been many antiepileptic drugs on the mearket, but no one has been found that can completely cure epilepsy. In this paper, the mentioned drugs were classified according to their targets, and the essential information, and clinical studies of each drug were described. The structure-activity relationship of different chemical structures was summarized. This paper provides help for the follow-up research on epilepsy drugs.

Characterising people with focal drug-resistant epilepsy: A retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To describe the demographics, clinical characteristics, drug treatment outcomes, healthcare resource utilization, and injuries among people with focal drug-resistant epilepsy (F-DRE) analysed separately for six European countries.

METHODS

We used electronic medical record data from six European (Belgium, Spain, Italy, France, UK and Germany) primary care/specialist care databases to identify antiseizure medication (ASM) treatment-naïve people (aged ≥ 18 years at F-DRE diagnosis). They were followed from their epilepsy diagnosis until death, the date of last record available, or study end. We used descriptive analyses to characterise the F-DRE cohort, and results were reported by country.

RESULTS

One-thousand-seventy individuals with F-DRE were included (mean age 52.5 years; 55.4 % female). The median follow-up time from the first diagnosis to the end of the follow-up was 95.5 months across all countries. The frequency of F-DRE diagnosis in 2021 ranged from 8.8 % in Italy to 18.2 % in Germany. Psychiatric disorders were the most common comorbidity across all countries. Frequently reported psychiatric disorders were depression (26.7 %) and anxiety (11.8 %). The median time from epilepsy diagnosis to the first ASM failure ranged from 5.9 (4.2-10.2) months in France to 12.6 (5.8-20.4) months in Spain. Levetiracetam and lamotrigine were the most commonly used ASM monotherapies in all countries. Consultation with a general practitioner is sought more frequently after F-DRE diagnosis than after epilepsy diagnosis, except in the UK.

SIGNIFICANCE

No one ASM is optimal for all people with F-DRE, and the risks and benefits of the ASM must be considered. Comorbidities must be an integral part of the management strategy and drive the choice of drugs.

Pharmacotherapy for Dravet Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Dravet syndrome (DS) is a severe developmental and epileptic encephalopathy characterized by drug-resistant, lifelong seizures. The management of seizures in DS has changed in recent years with the approval of new antiseizure medications (ASMs).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to estimate the comparative efficacy and tolerability of the ASMs for the treatment of seizures associated with DS using a network meta-analysis (NMA).

METHODS

Studies were identified by conducting a systematic search (week 4, January 2023) of the MEDLINE (accessed by PubMed), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry ( http://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov ) databases. Any randomized, controlled, double- or single-blinded, parallel-group study comparing at least one ASM therapy against placebo, another ASM, or a different dose of the same ASM in participants with a diagnosis of DS was identified. The efficacy outcomes were the proportions of participants with ≥ 50% (seizure response) and 100% reduction (seizure freedom) in baseline convulsive seizure frequency during the maintenance period. The tolerability outcomes included the proportions of patients who withdrew from treatment for any reason and who experienced at least one adverse event (AE). Effect sizes were estimated by network meta-analyses within a frequentist framework.

RESULTS

Eight placebo-controlled trials were included, and the active add-on treatments were stiripentol (n = 2), pharmaceutical-grade cannabidiol (n = 3), fenfluramine hydrochloride (n = 2), and soticlestat (n = 1). The studies recruited 680 participants, of whom 409 were randomized to active treatments (stiripentol = 33, pharmaceutical-grade cannabidiol = 228, fenfluramine hydrochloride = 122, and soticlestat = 26) and 271 to placebo. Pharmaceutical-grade cannabidiol was associated with a lower rate of seizure response than fenfluramine hydrochloride (odds ratio [OR] 0.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.07-0.54), and stiripentol was associated with a higher seizure response rate than pharmaceutical-grade cannabidiol (OR 14.07, 95% CI 2.57-76.87). No statistically significant differences emerged across the different ASMs for the seizure freedom outcome. Stiripentol was associated with a lower probability of drug discontinuation for any reason than pharmaceutical-grade cannabidiol (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.04-5.69), and pharmaceutical-grade cannabidiol was associated with a lower proportion of participants experiencing any AE than fenfluramine hydrochloride (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.06-0.78). Stiripentol had a higher risk of AE occurrence than pharmaceutical-grade cannabidiol (OR 75.72, 95% CI 3.59-1598.58). The study found high-quality evidence of efficacy and tolerability of the four ASMs in the treatment of convulsive seizures in DS.

CONCLUSIONS

There exists first-class evidence that documents the efficacy and tolerability of stiripentol, pharmaceutical-grade cannabidiol, fenfluramine hydrochloride, and soticlestat for the treatment of seizures associated with DS, and allows discussion about the expected outcomes regarding seizure frequency reduction and tolerability profiles.

The pharmacological treatment of epilepsy in adults

The pharmacological treatment of epilepsy entails several critical decisions that need to be based on an individual careful risk-benefit analysis. These include when to initiate treatment and with which antiseizure medication (ASM). With more than 25 ASMs on the market, physicians have opportunities to tailor the treatment to individual patients´ needs. ASM selection is primarily based on the patient's type of epilepsy and spectrum of ASM efficacy, but several other factors must be considered. These include age, sex, comorbidities, and concomitant medications to mention the most important. Individual susceptibility to adverse drug effects, ease of use, costs, and personal preferences should also be taken into account. Once an ASM has been selected, the next step is to decide on an individual target maintenance dose and a titration scheme to reach this dose. When the clinical circumstances permit, a slow titration is generally preferred since it is associated with improved tolerability. The maintenance dose is adjusted based on the clinical response aiming at the lowest effective dose. Therapeutic drug monitoring can be of value in efforts to establish the optimal dose. If the first monotherapy fails to control seizures without significant adverse effects, the next step will be to gradually switch to an alternative monotherapy, or sometimes to add another ASM. If an add-on is considered, combining ASMs with different modes of action is usually recommended. Misdiagnosis of epilepsy, non-adherence and suboptimal dosing are frequent causes of treatment failure and should be excluded before a patient is regarded as drug-resistant. Other treatment modalities, including epilepsy surgery, neuromodulation, and dietary therapies, should be considered for truly drug-resistant patients. After some years of seizure freedom, the question of ASM withdrawal often arises. Although successful in many, withdrawal is also associated with risks and the decision needs to be based on careful risk-benefit analysis.

Prescribed antiseizure medication doses and their relation to defined daily doses for achieving seizure freedom in newly diagnosed patients with epilepsy

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the antiseizure medication (ASM) doses required to achieve seizure freedom and their correlation with the World Health Organization's defined daily doses (DDDs) in patients aged 16 years or older with newly diagnosed epilepsy.

METHODS

The study included 459 patients with a validated diagnosis of new-onset epilepsy. Patient records were retrospectively analyzed to determine the ASM doses in patients with or without seizure freedom during follow-up. The DDD of the relevant ASM was then retrieved.

RESULTS

The seizure-freedom rate with first and subsequent ASMs was 88% (404/459 patients) during the follow-up. The mean prescribed doses (PDDs) and PDD/DDD ratio of the most commonly used ASMs, ie, oxcarbazepine (OXC), carbamazepine (CBZ), and valproic acid (VPA), differed significantly between seizure-free and non-seizure-free status (992 mg and 0.99 vs 1132 mg and 1.13; 547 mg and 0.55 vs 659 mg and 0.66; and 953 mg and 0.64 vs 1260 mg and 0.84, respectively). The effect of the OXC dose as the first failed ASM on the possibility of achieving seizure freedom was significant (Fisher's exact test, p = 0.002). Thirty-four of 43 patients (79%) in which an OXC dose of ≤900 mg failed became seizure-free, as compared with 24 of 54 patients (44%) with a failed OXC dose >900 mg.

SIGNIFICANCE

The present study provides new insights into the doses of the commonly used ASMs such as OXC, CBZ, and VPA that can lead to seizure freedom as monotherapy or as combination therapy. The higher PDD/DDD ratio of OXC (0.99) than that of CBZ or VPA renders a generalized PDD/DDD comparison highly problematic.

Adult epilepsy

Epilepsy is a common medical condition that affects people of all ages, races, social classes, and geographical regions. Diagnosis of epilepsy remains clinical, and ancillary investigations (electroencephalography, imaging, etc) are of aid to determine the type, cause, and prognosis. Antiseizure medications represent the mainstay of epilepsy treatment: they aim to suppress seizures without adverse events, but they do not affect the underlying predisposition to generate seizures. Currently available antiseizure medications are effective in around two-thirds of patients with epilepsy. Neurosurgical resection is an effective strategy to reach seizure control in selected individuals with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Non-pharmacological treatments such as palliative surgery (eg, corpus callosotomy), neuromodulation techniques (eg, vagus nerve stimulation), and dietary interventions represent therapeutic options for patients with drug-resistant epilepsy who are not suitable for resective brain surgery.

The effect of cannabidiol on seizure features and quality of life in drug-resistant frontal lobe epilepsy patients: a triple-blind controlled trial

Background

Treatment-resistant epileptic seizures are associated with reduced quality of life (QoL). As polypharmacy with routine antiseizure medications has many side effects, novel add-on treatments are necessary. Recent research showed the efficacy of add-on therapy by cannabidiol (CBD) on refractory epilepsy. We attempted to extend data on the efficacy and safety profile of CBD in patients with frontal lobe treatment-resistant epilepsy.

Methods

A total of 27 patients were recruited into two CBD (n = 12) and placebo (n = 15) groups. The CBD group received a highly purified liposomal preparation of the drug in addition to routine antiseizure medications. The placebo group only received antiseizure medications. This experiment followed a triple-blinding protocol. Outcome measures were seizure frequency, the Chalfont seizure severity scale (CSSS), and the quality of life questionnaire score (QOLIE-31) assessed at baseline, 4 weeks, and 8 weeks.

Results

At 4 weeks, results indicated that a higher fraction of patients in the CBD group (66.67%) showed improvement in seizure, compared to the placebo group (20.00%). Before-after comparison revealed that CBD, unlike routine ADEs, was effective in reducing the occurrence of seizures at the study's final timepoint [mean difference 45.58, 95% CI (8.987 to 82.18), p = 0.009]. Seizure severity was not affected by study groups or time intervals (repeated-measures ANOVA p > 0.05). Post-hoc tests found that the QoLI-31 score was improved at 8 weeks compared to baseline [mean diff. -5.031, 95% CI (-9.729 to -0.3328), p = 0.032]. The difference in cases who experienced enhanced QoL was meaningful between the CBD and placebo groups at 8 weeks [RR: 2.160, 95% CI (1.148 to 4.741), p = 0.018] but not at 4 weeks (p = 0.653). A positive finding for QoL improvement was associated with a positive finding for seizure frequency reduction [r = 0.638, 95% CI (0.296 to 0.835), p = 0.001]. Interestingly, limiting the correlation analysis to cases receiving CBD indicated that QoL improvement was not linked with seizure parameters such as severity and frequency (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

The present study suggests the benefit of a purified and highly efficient preparation of CBD for seizure frequency reduction and improvement of QoL in refractory frontal lobe epilepsy. Further study with longer follow-ups and larger sample size is advised.

Clinical trial registration

https://www.irct.ir/trial/56790, identifier: IRCT20210608051515N1.

Initial monotherapy with eslicarbazepine acetate for the management of adult patients with focal epilepsy in clinical practice: a meta-analysis of observational studies

AIM OF THE STUDY

To assess the effectiveness, overall tolerability of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) as an initial or early monotherapy treatment of adult patients with focal epilepsy under real-world practice conditions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We focused on real-world longitudinal studies that included or separately reported the results of at least one of the efficacy outcomes of interest. A DerSimonian-Laird random effects model was used with the presentation of the 95% confidence intervals of the estimate.

RESULTS

5 studies met our selection criteria and were included in the quantitative synthesis. All studies were observational and uncontrolled studies, and all but one were retrospective studies. The pooled proportion of patients who were seizure-free for the entire study period was 64.6% (95% CI, 45.7 to 79.8) at month 6 and 56.6% (95% CI, 50.2 to 62.8) at month 12. Pooled retention rates were 95.0% (95% CI, 90.3 to 97.5) at 6 months and 83.6% (95% CI, 73.9 to 90.1) at 12 months. The pooled proportion of patients who reported at least one adverse event was 27.2% (95% CI, 21.7 to 33.6), and the pooled proportion of patients who discontinued ESL due to adverse events was 8.9% (95% CI 6.2 to 12.6).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that initial or early monotherapy with ESL is effective and well-tolerated for the management of adult patients with focal epilepsy in clinical practice, with results that are at least similar to those reported in the pivotal randomized clinical trial of ESL monotherapy. No new safety signals with ESL have been identified in this systematic review.

New evidence in adjunctive treatment of focal-onset seizures in adults: a critical appraisal

Anti-seizure medications (ASMs) represent the pillar of the treatment of epilepsy. The rate of drug-resistant epilepsy remained substantially unchanged over time and there is still the need for new and more effective treatment options. Brivaracetam, cenobamate, eslicarbazepine acetate, lacosamide and perampanel are 'third-generation' ASMs. The aim of this article is to summarize the currently available evidence about the relative efficacy and tolerability of the 'third-generation' ASMs as adjunctive treatment of focal-onset seizures in adults. So far, no randomized controlled study directly compared these ASMs, and their comparative efficacy and tolerability have been indirectly evaluated by one network meta-analysis. Sixteen trials were included in the network meta-analysis. The efficacy endpoints were the rates of seizure response and seizure freedom, defined as ≥ 50% and 100% reduction in baseline monthly seizure frequency. The tolerability endpoints were the rate of patients who developed any treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and any TEAE leading to drug discontinuation. Cenobamate had the greatest likelihood of being the best option for the ≥ 50% and 100% seizure frequency reduction. Brivaracetam and lacosamide had the greatest likelihood to rank as the best-tolerated treatments for the occurrence of any TEAE and TEAE leading to discontinuation. Although network meta-analyses are not substitutes of direct comparisons, they can provide valuable evidence about the hierarchy of interventions. Additional real-world data can be useful complement to characterize the clinical profile and therapeutic potentialities of third-generation ASMs.

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.

Third-Generation Antiseizure Medications for Adjunctive Treatment of Focal-Onset Seizures in Adults: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

Background

Brivaracetam (BRV), cenobamate (CNB), eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL), lacosamide (LCM) and perampanel (PER) are antiseizure medications (ASMs) approved for adjunctive treatment of focal-onset seizures. So far, no randomised controlled trial directly compared the efficacy and safety of these drugs.

Objective

We estimated the comparative efficacy and safety of these ASMs for the treatment of focal-onset seizures in adults with epilepsy using a network meta-analysis (NMA).

Methods

We systematically searched (June week 4, 2021) MEDLINE (accessed by PubMed), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov). There were no date limitations or language restrictions. Randomised, double-blinded, controlled, parallel-group, add-on studies that compared oral BRV, CNB, ESL, LCM, and PER versus any comparator over maintenance periods of at least 12 weeks and included adult patients with focal seizures uncontrolled by concomitant ASMs were identified. The efficacy outcomes were the proportions of patients with ≥ 50% and 100% reduction in baseline seizure frequency during the maintenance period. The tolerability outcomes were the proportions of participants who experienced at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) and experienced at least one TEAE leading to discontinuation. Effect sizes were estimated by network meta-analyses within a frequentist framework. The hierarchy of competing interventions was established using the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA).

Results

Sixteen trials (BRV: n = 3, CNB: n = 1, ESL: n = 4, LCM: n = 4, PER: n = 4) were included, overall enrolling 4507 patients randomised to add-on active treatments (BRV = 803, CNB = 221, ESL =9 90, LCM = 1104, and PER = 1389) and 2246 to add-on placebo. Cenobamate was associated with a higher rate of ≥ 50% seizure frequency reduction than BRV [odds ratio (OR) 2.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11–3.66], ESL (OR 1.93, 95% CI 1.07–3.48), LCM (OR 1.86, 95% CI 1.04–3.32), and PER (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.16–3.70). There was a not statistically significant trend favouring CNB over ESL, LCM and PER for the seizure freedom outcome. Brivaracetam (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.44–0.86) and LCM (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.40–0.88) were associated with a lower proportion of participants experiencing TEAEs compared to ESL, and patients treated with PER were associated with a higher risk to experience at least one TEAE (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.02–1.96) than BRV. According to SUCRA, CNB had the greatest likelihood of being the best option for the ≥ 50% and 100% seizure frequency reduction, and BRV and LCM had the highest probabilities of being the best-tolerated treatments.

Conclusions

Cenobamate ranked best for efficacy, and BRV and LCM were best tolerated over the other comparators. Although NMAs cannot replace direct comparisons, they may support physicians in clinical decision making.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40265-021-01661-4.

The efficacy and safety of adjunctive Perampanel for the treatment of refractory focal-onset seizures in patients with epilepsy:A meta-analysis

Objective

The last decade has seen an increase in the use of anti‐seizure medications (ASMs); however, the burden of treating drug‐resistant epilepsy has not fallen. We performed this meta‐analysis to evaluate the optimal dose of Perampanel (PER) as a new adjunctive treatment for drug‐resistant seizures.

Methods

We searched for studies published from inception to February 1, 2021 from PubMed, Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ScienceDirect. Research characteristics, patients' characteristics, and treatment regimen, concomitant ASMs, clinical outcomes were extracted. The practical outcome included a reduction in seizures frequency ≥50%, ≥75%, and ≥100% from baseline convulsive seizure frequency, and the safety outcome included the proportion of drug withdrawal and adverse reactions. Odds ratios (OR) for 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated by the inverse variance method.

Results

Four trials which enrolled 2187 participants (1569 in the PER group and 618 in the placebo group) were included. Results showed that 8 or 12 mg per day had the best effect on all three outcomes, with no significant difference between 8 and 12 mg per day (≥50% reduction, 35.5% vs 36.1%, P = .84; ≥75% reduction, 17.8% vs 19.1%, P = .64; seizure‐free, 3.5% vs 3.7%, P = .85). In addition, 12‐mg PER compared to 8 mg had a higher proportion of trial withdrawal (8.7% vs 17.0%; P < .00001) and treatment‐emergent adverse event (TEAE) resulting in dose reduction/discontinuation (18.5% vs 32.0%; P < .00001). The adverse events (AEs) significantly associated with adjunctive PER were dizziness, somnolence, fatigue, and irritability.

Significance

Adjunctive treatment of PER was associated with a more significant reduction in the frequency of seizures in patients with refractory epilepsy than placebo, but with a higher frequency of AEs. PER at a daily dose of 8 mg appears to have the best ratio between efficacy and tolerance in most study participants.

Antiepileptic medicines in men and women with stroke in Sweden, a registry-based study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

To describe the utilization of the first antiepileptic drug (AED) in men and women with previous stroke in a nationwide population.

METHODS

Prescription data, patient's age, and sex were collected from the Swedish Drug Register and cross-linked to diagnosis data from the National Patient Register and data from Statistics Sweden. Patients with a first dispensation of an AED after stroke between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2014 were included.

RESULTS

A total of 10 958 patients with stroke were initiated on AED treatment (51% women, mean age 75 years). Gabapentin (n = 3073, 28%), pregabalin (n = 2476, 22%), carbamazepine (n = 2330, 21%), levetiracetam (n = 1158, 10%), and valproic acid (n = 833, 7%) were the most dispensed AEDs. After stratification by the presence of a neuropathic pain diagnosis, gabapentin, and pregabalin were the most used AEDs. In contrast, after stratification for epilepsy/convulsions diagnosis, carbamazepine and levetiracetam were the most initiated AEDs.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that AED is mainly used for neuropathic/poststroke pain and the study shows gabapentin and pregabalin to be the most used AEDs. For epilepsy, carbamazepine and levetiracetam were the most used AEDs in patients with previous stroke.

Safety and Tolerability of Lacosamide in Patients With Epilepsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: As a third-generation antiseizure medication (ASM), lacosamide (LCM) is recommended worldwide for patients with epilepsy. We aimed to provide more conclusive evidence for the safety and tolerability of LCM in patients with epilepsy. Methods: A systematic search was performed on MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, CBM, CNKI, IDB, VIP Database, and Wanfang Database from inception to 2021 March, and all studies assessing the safety of LCM were included. A meta-analysis was performed for safety data of LCM. Results: Eighty-three studies involving 12268 populations (11 randomized clinical trials (RCTs), 16 cohort studies, 53 case series, and 3 case reports) were included in our study. Meta-analysis of the total incidence of adverse events (AEs) of LCM was 38.7% [95% CI (35.1%, 45.8%); n=75 studies]. Incidence of withdrawal due to AEs was 10.8% [95% CI (9.1%, 12.6%); n=56 studies], and incidence of serious adverse events (SAEs) was 6.5% [95% CI (4.0%, 8.9%); n=13 studies]. Most AEs were in the nervous system and digestive system. The most common AEs were sedation (15.8%), dizziness (15.7%), fatigue (9.4%), and nausea/vomiting (9.3%). For children, the total incidence of AEs of LCM was 32.8% [95% CI (21.6%, 44.0%); n=16 studies], and the most common AEs were dizziness (8.6%), nausea/vomiting (8.6%), and somnolence (6.8%). Conclusion: Lacosamide is generally safe and well tolerated in patients with epilepsy. Common AEs were sedation, dizziness, and fatigue. It is necessary to pay more attention to the prevention and management of these AEs and conduct more large-scale and high-quality studies to update safety data.

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.

Safety of Eslicarbazepine Acetate in Elderly Versus Non-Elderly Patients with Focal Seizures: From Pooled Data of Clinical Studies to 8 Years of Post-Marketing Experience

Introduction

The prevalence of epilepsy increases in elderly patients aged > 65 years, and treatment is challenging because clinical data are limited.

Objective

Our objective was to evaluate the safety of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) in patients aged ≥ 65 years versus non-elderly patients with focal seizures.

Methods

The safety data of seven phase II and III, double-blind, open-label, randomized clinical studies of ESL in adults were pooled. At least possibly related treatmentemergent adverse events (TEAEs) and ESL post-marketing adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were analyzed separately by age categories.

Results

The most frequently reported at least possibly related TEAEs in elderly (N = 120) versus non-elderly patients (N = 1863) were dizziness (10.8 vs. 20.3%), somnolence (9.2 vs. 12.6%), and hyponatremia (6.7 vs. 1.5%). Elderly patients presented a higher incidence of serious TEAEs (22.5 vs. 7.6%) and at least possibly related serious TEAEs (6.7 vs. 2.5%), probably because treatment was complicated by comorbidities and comedications. After an estimated cumulative exposure of over 2 million patient-months worldwide and 8 years of post-marketing surveillance, hyponatremia was the most frequently reported ADR (n = 232), accounting for 14.6% and 6.8% of the ADRs reported in elderly (n = 473) and non-elderly patients (n = 2406), respectively. This was followed by ADR/safety information such as drug–dose titration not performed (7.0 vs. 5.4%), product use in unapproved indication (4.9 vs. 1.9%), off-label use (3.4 vs. 2.2%), dizziness (3.4 vs. 3.5%), and seizure (2.1 vs. 5.8%).

Conclusion

No specific safety issue was identified from the pooled studies for elderly compared with non-elderly patients. After 8 years of post-marketing surveillance, the qualitative safety of ESL remains similar to that observed in the clinical studies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40264-021-01097-5.

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.

Antiseizure medications for post-stroke epilepsy: A real-world prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The management of post-stroke epilepsy (PSE) should ideally include prevention of both seizure and adverse effects; however, an optimal antiseizure medications (ASM) regimen has yet been established. The purpose of this study is to assess seizure recurrence, retention, and tolerability of older-generation and newer-generation ASM for PSE.

METHODS

This prospective multicenter cohort study (PROgnosis of Post-Stroke Epilepsy [PROPOSE] study) was conducted from November 2014 to September 2019 at eight hospitals. A total of 372 patients admitted and treated with ASM at discharge were recruited. Due to the non-interventional nature of the study, ASM regimen was not adjusted and followed standard hospital practices. The primary outcome was seizure recurrence in patients receiving older-generation and newer-generation ASM. The secondary outcomes were the retention and tolerability of ASM regimens.

RESULTS

Of the 372 PSE patients with ASM at discharge (median [IQR] age, 73 [64-81] years; 139 women [37.4%]), 36 were treated with older-generation, 286 with newer-generation, and 50 with mixed-generation ASM. In older- and newer-generation ASM groups (n = 322), 98 patients (30.4%) had recurrent seizures and 91 patients (28.3%) switched ASM regimen during the follow-up (371 [347-420] days). Seizure recurrence was lower in newer-generation, compared with the older-generation, ASM (hazard ratio [HR], 0.42, 95%CI 0.27-0.70; p = .0013). ASM regimen withdrawal and change of dosages were lower in newer-generation ASM (HR, 0.34, 95% CI 0.21-0.56, p < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Newer-generation ASM possess advantages over older-generation ASM for secondary prophylaxis of post-stroke seizures in clinical practice.

Which treatment strategy in patients with epilepsy with focal seizures uncontrolled by the first anti-seizure medication?

There is no definite proven or accepted strategy in the management of patients with focal epilepsy uncontrolled by the first anti-seizure medication (ASM). Clinical studies failed to find a significant difference in efficacy or tolerability between alternative monotherapy and/or adjunctive therapy in these patients. A second ASM is often added, the efficacy of the combination is assessed, and the dose of the first drug can be gradually reduced and withdrawn. If seizures recur, the effective combination therapy can be reinstated. In this review, we discussed experimental and clinical data about the efficacy and tolerability of the most frequently used combinations of ASMs. Animal studies suggested that the most favorable combinations are those between ASMs with different or multiple mechanisms of action, whereas combining drugs with similar pharmacodynamic properties is often associated with additive or infra-additive efficacy and additive or synergistic toxicity. Clinical studies have shown that levetiracetam (LEV) can be favorably combined with the sodium channel blockers (SCBs) lacosamide (LCM) and lamotrigine (LTG). Lamotrigine is particularly effective when associated with valproate (VPA) and possibly with LEV and topiramate (TPM). Carbamazepine (CBZ) has negative pharmacokinetic interactions with several ASMs and should not be combined with other SCBs; it could be effectively and safely combined with gabapentin (GBP) and LEV. Valproic acid has enzyme inhibiting properties and can be cautiously used with SCBs; its combination with TPM or zonisamide (ZNS) may be associated with higher toxicity.

Response to first antiseizure medication in patients diagnosed with epilepsy

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the interaction among the efficacy, tolerability and overall effectiveness of the first antiseizure medication in patients 16 years or older with newly diagnosed epilepsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study included 584 patients who were referred to the Tampere University Hospital between 1 January 1995 and 31 December 2005 and were diagnosed with epilepsy. All individuals were retrospectively followed up until 31 December 2006, until reaching at least one year of seizure freedom, or until death if before the cut-off date.

RESULTS

Overall, after thorough validation of the epilepsy diagnosis 459 patients comprised the study cohort; among these patients, 73% of males and 60% of females became seizure-free for at least one year with the first antiseizure medication. The seizure freedom rate for focal epilepsy was 67%. There was no significant difference in focal epilepsy to achieve seizure freedom between oxcarbazepine, carbamazepine or valproic acid. The seizure freedom rate among patients above 60 years of age was 67%. For patients with structural and unknown aetiology, seizure freedom rates were 61.5% and 75.3%, respectively. Additionally, epileptiform activity on EEG in patients with focal epilepsy decreased odds of seizure freedom in adjusted logistic regression models (OR 0.55, p=0.036).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a more positive prediction of seizure freedom compared with previous studies with the onset of epilepsy at 16 years or older with an overall estimation that two-thirds of patients with new-onset epilepsy obtain seizure freedom with the first antiseizure medication.

Treating of focal epilepsy: a patent review

Focal epilepsy is one of the most frequent specific type of epilepsies, with 30% treatment-resistant patients. There are several directions researchers can follow to improve existing treatment of focal epilepsy: synthesis of new compounds with anticonvulsant activity, repurposing drugs approved for other indications, finding drugs targeted to specific genetic and biochemical defects that underlie focal epilepsy syndromes, development of viral vectors for specific gene therapy, creation of devices and methods for suppression of seizures by electrostimulation and development of methods to increase safety of epilepsy surgery. Improvement of efficacy and safety of current therapies is necessary, as well as developing targeted treatment of genetic epilepsy syndromes that will not only suppress seizures, but stop further epileptogenesis.

Seizures and Epilepsy After Stroke: Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Management

Stroke is the leading cause of seizures and epilepsy in older adults. Patients who have larger and more severe strokes involving the cortex, are younger, and have acute symptomatic seizures and intracerebral haemorrhage are at highest risk of developing post-stroke epilepsy. Prognostic models, including the SeLECT and CAVE scores, help gauge the risk of epileptogenesis. Early electroencephalogram and blood-based biomarkers can provide information additional to the clinical risk factors of post-stroke epilepsy. The management of acute versus remote symptomatic seizures after stroke is markedly different. The choice of an ideal antiseizure medication should not only rely on efficacy but also consider adverse effects, altered pharmacodynamics in older adults, and the influence on the underlying vascular co-morbidity. Drug-drug interactions, particularly those between antiseizure medications and anticoagulants or antiplatelets, also influence treatment decisions. In this review, we describe the epidemiology, risk factors, biomarkers, and management of seizures after an ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke. We discuss the special considerations required for the treatment of post-stroke epilepsy due to the age, co-morbidities, co-medication, and vulnerability of stroke survivors.

Ganaxolone treatment for epilepsy patients: from pharmacology to place in therapy

Introduction: Nonsulfated neurosteroids can provide phasic and tonic inhibition through activation of synaptic and extra-synaptic γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA)_A receptors, exhibiting a greater potency for the latter. These actions occur by interacting with modulatory sites that are distinct from those bound by benzodiazepines and barbiturates. Ganaxolone (GNX) is a synthetic analog of the endogenous neurosteroid allopregnanolone and a member of a novel class of neuroactive steroids called epalons.Areas covered: The authors review the pharmacology of GNX, summarize the main clinical evidence about its antiseizure efficacy and tolerability, and suggest implications for clinical practice and future research.Expert opinion: The clinical development of GNX is mainly oriented to target unmet needs and focused on status epilepticus and rare genetic epilepsies that have few or no treatment options.The availability of oral and intravenous formulations allows reaching adult and pediatric patients in acute and chronic care settings. Further evidence will complement the understanding of the potentialities of GNX and possibly lead to indications for use in clinical practice.

Highly Purified Cannabidiol for Epilepsy Treatment: A Systematic Review of Epileptic Conditions Beyond Dravet Syndrome and Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Cannabidiol (CBD), which is one major constituent of the Cannabis sativa plant, has anti-seizure properties and does not produce euphoric or intrusive side effects. A plant-derived, highly purified CBD formulation with a known and constant composition has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of seizures associated with Dravet syndrome, Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, and tuberous sclerosis complex. In the European Union, the drug has been authorized by the European Medicines Agency for the treatment of seizures associated with Dravet syndrome and Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, in conjunction with clobazam, and is under regulatory review for the treatment of seizures in patients with tuberous sclerosis complex.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to summarize the currently available body of knowledge about the use of this US Food and Drug Administration/European Medicines Agency-approved oral formulation of pharmaceutical-grade CBD in patients with epileptic conditions, especially developmental and epileptic encephalopathies other than Dravet syndrome and Lennox-Gastaut syndrome.

METHODS

The relevant studies were identified through MEDLINE and the US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry in October 2020. There were no date limitations or language restrictions. The following types of studies were included: clinical trials, cohorts, case-control, cross-sectional, clinical series, and case reports. Participants had to meet the following criteria: any sex, any ethnicity, any age, diagnosis of epilepsy, receiving plant-derived, highly purified (> 98% w/w) CBD in a sesame oil-based oral solution for the treatment of seizures. Data extracted from selected records included efficacy, tolerability, and safety outcomes.

RESULTS

Five hundred and seventy records were identified by database and trial register searching. Fifty-seven studies were retrieved for detailed assessment, of which 42 were eventually included for the review. The participants of the studies included patients of both pediatric and adult age. Across the trials, purified CBD was administered at dosages up to 50 mg/kg/day. In a randomized double-blind controlled trial in patients with tuberous sclerosis complex, CBD was associated with a significantly greater percent reduction in seizure frequency than placebo over the treatment period. Open-label studies suggested the effectiveness of CBD in the treatment of children and adults presenting with other epilepsy syndromes than those addressed by regulatory trials, including CDKL5 deficiency disorder and Aicardi, Dup15q, and Doose syndromes, SYNGAP1 encephalopathy, and epilepsy with myoclonic absences. The most common adverse events observed during treatment with CBD included somnolence, decreased appetite, diarrhea, and increased serum aminotransferases.

CONCLUSIONS

The currently available data suggest that response to treatment with a highly purified, plant-derived CBD oil-based solution can be seen in patients across a broad range of epilepsy disorders and etiologies. The existing evidence can provide preliminary support for additional research.

Medical Management in Focal versus Generalized Epilepsy

About 70% of children with new-onset epilepsy have the potential to become seizure-free on antiepileptic drug (AED) monotherapy with appropriately selected first-line medication. In ideal world, physician is expected to achieve best possible seizure control without impacting the quality of life. There is rapid increase in number of AEDs available over last couple of decades. Although not necessarily all of them are superior to old generation drugs in terms of seizure control, certainly there is change in landscape from perspective of tolerability and side-effect profile. Physicians must therefore be familiar with safety, tolerability, therapeutic effects, synergistic combinations as well as AEDs to avoid in specific circumstances. The article attempts to give general overview of available AEDs under broad umbrella of effectiveness against focal and generalized seizures as well as drugs with “broad spectrum.” The emergence of newer AEDs with broad spectrum and favorable side-effect profile is welcome. However, the future lies in better understanding of underlying diverse pathophysiology of clinical symptom “epilepsy” and developing new compounds acting on molecular targets as well as individualizing therapy. Technological advances in molecular genetics research are bringing precision medicine to the fore.

What has been the impact of new drug treatments on epilepsy?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Nearly two dozen antiseizure medications (ASMs) with different mechanisms of action have been introduced over the past three decades with the aim of providing better efficacy or safety profile than the previous drugs. Several new ASMs with improvement on a classic drug family or have novel mechanisms of action have been recently approved for epilepsy. The present review explored recent studies or guidelines on new agents and discussed the potential impact of these novel treatments on epilepsy management and future directions of research.

RECENT FINDINGS

Long-term cohort studies showed that, collectively, the second-generation did not improve the overall prognosis of epilepsy. Individual monotherapy studies showed similar efficacy of second-generation (levetiracetam and zonisamide) and third-generation (eslicarbazepine acetate and lacosamide) ASMs compared to controlled-release carbamazepine for the treatment of focal epilepsy. However, there appears to be no evidence to support any second-generation or third-generation ASMs to be as efficacious as valproate monotherapy for generalized and unclassified epilepsies. Cannabidiol adjunctive treatments were found to be efficacious for Dravet syndrome and Lennox-Gastaut syndrome. Although most newer generation ASMs are less prone to drug-drug interactions, stiripentol and cannabidiol can elevate the plasma concentration of N-desmethylclobazam, the active metabolite of clobazam. Generally speaking, the second-generation ASMs have lower teratogenic risk than the older drugs but there is scant study on neurodevelopmental effect of third-generation ASMs.

SUMMARY

Although the newer generation ASMs may not have improved the overall seizure control they have advantages in terms of drug-drug interactions and teratogenicity, and thus offer valuable individualized options in the treatment of epilepsy.

The Pharmacology and Clinical Efficacy of Antiseizure Medications: From Bromide Salts to Cenobamate and Beyond

Epilepsy is one of the most common and disabling chronic neurological disorders. Antiseizure medications (ASMs), previously referred to as anticonvulsant or antiepileptic drugs, are the mainstay of symptomatic epilepsy treatment. Epilepsy is a multifaceted complex disease and so is its treatment. Currently, about 30 ASMs are available for epilepsy therapy. Furthermore, several ASMs are approved therapies in nonepileptic conditions, including neuropathic pain, migraine, bipolar disorder, and generalized anxiety disorder. Because of this wide spectrum of therapeutic activity, ASMs are among the most often prescribed centrally active agents. Most ASMs act by modulation of voltage-gated ion channels; by enhancement of gamma aminobutyric acid-mediated inhibition; through interactions with elements of the synaptic release machinery; by blockade of ionotropic glutamate receptors; or by combinations of these mechanisms. Because of differences in their mechanisms of action, most ASMs do not suppress all types of seizures, so appropriate treatment choices are important. The goal of epilepsy therapy is the complete elimination of seizures; however, this is not achievable in about one-third of patients. Both in vivo and in vitro models of seizures and epilepsy are used to discover ASMs that are more effective in patients with continued drug-resistant seizures. Furthermore, therapies that are specific to epilepsy etiology are being developed. Currently, ~ 30 new compounds with diverse antiseizure mechanisms are in the preclinical or clinical drug development pipeline. Moreover, therapies with potential antiepileptogenic or disease-modifying effects are in preclinical and clinical development. Overall, the world of epilepsy therapy development is changing and evolving in many exciting and important ways. However, while new epilepsy therapies are developed, knowledge of the pharmacokinetics, antiseizure efficacy and spectrum, and adverse effect profiles of currently used ASMs is an essential component of treating epilepsy successfully and maintaining a high quality of life for every patient, particularly those receiving polypharmacy for drug-resistant seizures.

Adjunctive Brivaracetam in Focal Epilepsy: Real-World Evidence from the BRIVAracetam add-on First Italian netwoRk STudy (BRIVAFIRST)

BACKGROUND

In randomized controlled trials, add-on brivaracetam (BRV) reduced seizure frequency in patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Studies performed in a naturalistic setting are a useful complement to characterize the drug profile.

OBJECTIVE

This multicentre study assessed the effectiveness and tolerability of adjunctive BRV in a large population of patients with focal epilepsy in the context of real-world clinical practice.

METHODS

The BRIVAFIRST (BRIVAracetam add-on First Italian netwoRk STudy) was a retrospective, multicentre study including adult patients prescribed adjunctive BRV. Patients with focal epilepsy and 12-month follow-up were considered. Main outcomes included the rates of seizure-freedom, seizure response (≥ 50% reduction in baseline seizure frequency), and treatment discontinuation. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) was also considered. Analyses by levetiracetam (LEV) status and concomitant use of strong enzyme-inducing antiseizure medications (EiASMs) and sodium channel blockers (SCBs) were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 1029 patients with a median age of 45 years (33-56) was included. At 12 months, 169 (16.4%) patients were seizure-free and 383 (37.2%) were seizure responders. The rate of seizure freedom was 22.3% in LEV-naive patients, 7.1% in patients with prior LEV use and discontinuation due to insufficient efficacy, and 31.2% in patients with prior LEV use and discontinuation due to AEs (p < 0.001); the corresponding values for ≥ 50% seizure frequency reduction were 47.9%, 29.7%, and 42.8% (p < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in seizure freedom and seizure response rates by use of strong EiASMs. The rates of seizure freedom (20.0% vs. 16.6%;  p = 0.341) and seizure response (39.7% vs. 26.9%; p = 0.006) were higher in patients receiving SCBs than those not receiving SCBs; 265 (25.8%) patients discontinued BRV. AEs were reported by 30.1% of patients, and were less common in patients treated with BRV and concomitant SCBs than those not treated with SCBs (28.9% vs. 39.8%; p = 0.017).

CONCLUSION

The BRIVAFIRST provided real-world evidence on the effectiveness of BRV in patients with focal epilepsy irrespective of LEV history and concomitant ASMs, and suggested favourable therapeutic combinations.

Current role of carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine in the management of epilepsy

Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological disorders, affecting approximately 50 million people worldwide. Despite a dramatic increase in treatment options over the past 30 years, it still ranks fourth in the world's disease burden. There are now close to 30 antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), with more than two thirds introduced to the market after carbamazepine (CBZ) and one third after its derivative, oxcarbazepine (OXC). Following the introduction of these newer AEDs, the role of CBZ and OXC in the therapeutic armamentarium for seizure control and effective epilepsy management needs to be reviewed. The main guidelines list both CBZ and OXC as first-line options or second-line alternatives for the treatment of focal-onset epilepsy and primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures. While evidence suggests that overall AEDs have similar efficacy, some newer AEDs may be better tolerated than CBZ. In line with this, there have been changes in treatment patterns, with many variations across different countries. However, CBZ remains among the two or three most prescribed drugs for focal epilepsy in many countries, and is widely used across Europe, Africa, South America, and Asia, where it represents a good compromise between cost, availability, and effectiveness. OXC is among the first-choice options for the initial treatment of focal-onset seizures in several countries, including the US and China, where the oral suspension is commonly prescribed. This review provides guidance on the optimal use of these two drugs in clinical practice, including in children, the elderly, and in pregnancy.

A Volumetric Absorptive Microsampling Technique to Monitor Cannabidiol Levels in Epilepsy Patients

Purpose: Interest in cannabis-based therapies has recently increased, due to the availability of cannabidiol (CBD) for the treatment of epilepsy without psychoactive effects. Therapeutic drug monitoring can prevent drug interactions and minimize drug toxicity. We evaluated a volumetric absorptive microsampling (VAMS) method combined with LC-MS/MS (liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry) for the quantification of CBD blood levels in patients with refractory epilepsy.

Methods: Prospective observation of patients with Dravet syndrome receiving open-label, add-on GW-purified CBD (Epidyolex^®) at different doses. CBD plasma samples were obtained from venipuncture and LC-MS/MS was used to measure CBD in venous and capillary blood samples collected by VAMS.

Results: We enrolled five patients with a mean age of 13 (range: 4–27) years. CBD levels measured by VAMS on capillary blood did not differ from CBD levels measured in plasma by venipuncture (R² > 0.93).

Conclusion: This proof-of-concept study suggests that VAMS allows monitoring of CBD plasma levels and can offer valuable support for personalized therapy in refractory epilepsy.

Practical use of pharmaceutically purified oral cannabidiol in Dravet syndrome and Lennox-Gastaut syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Pharmaceutically purified oral cannabidiol (CBD) has been recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency as treatment of seizures associated with Dravet syndrome (DS) and Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS), which are severe and difficult-to-treat developmental and epileptic encephalopathies with onset in early childhood.

AREAS COVERED

This review will critically review the pharmacokinetic properties of CBD, the interactions with antiseizure and non-antiseizure medications, and the main tolerability and safety issues to provide guidance for its use in everyday practice.

EXPERT OPINION

CBD is metabolized in the liver and can influence the activity of enzymes involved in drug metabolism. The best characterized drug-drug interaction is between CBD and clobazam. The most common adverse events include somnolence, gastrointestinal discomfort, and increase in serum transaminases. High-grade purified CBD oral solution represents an effective therapeutic option in patients with DS and LGS. The findings cannot be extrapolated to other cannabis-based products, synthetic cannabinoids for medicinal use and non-medicinal cannabis and CBD derivatives.

Pharmacological treatment of focal epilepsy in adults: an evidence based approach

INTRODUCTION

Focal seizures represent the most common seizure type and focal epilepsies the most common epilepsy type. Anti-seizure medications (ASMs) still represent the main form of treatment for epilepsy.

AREAS COVERED

The aim of this review article is to provide an overview of available evidence about current and upcoming pharmacological options and strategies for adults with focal epilepsy focusing on the last 5 years.

EXPERT OPINION

Seventeen drugs are currently approved for the treatment of focal seizures including cenobamate as the very latest option. Ten of these drugs are also licensed for monotherapy. Level A evidence for initial monotherapy is available for seven drugs with no robust data supporting that one drug is superior to the other. Safety, tolerability as well as pharmacoeconomic reasons would then drive treatment decisions. Data on adjunctive treatment are available for 13 ASMs showing again no obvious difference in terms of efficacy. Evidence on specific drug combinations is almost non-existent and the final decision of combining specific drugs is based on the experience of the individual clinician rather than on robust evidence. Current outcome measures do not consider number of previously failed drugs and the observation period is often too short.

Comparative analysis of the safety and tolerability of eslicarbazepine acetate in older (≥60 years) and younger (18-59 years) adults

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the safety and tolerability of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL), a once-daily oral anti-seizure drug (ASD), in older and younger adult patient populations.

METHODS

Two post-hoc pooled data analyses were performed: one from three Phase III studies in patients with focal (partial-onset) seizures who were taking 1-3 concomitant ASDs; the other from five Phase II studies in patients from non-epilepsy populations not taking other ASDs chronically and/or at a clinically-effective anti-seizure dose. The frequencies of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were calculated for the older (≥60 years) and younger (18-59 years) adults separately.

RESULTS

In the focal seizures study pool, 4.1 % of patients (58/1431) were aged ≥60 years. The overall frequency of TEAEs was 77.5 % in older ESL-treated patients and 72.6 % in younger ESL-treated patients (p = 0.495). For patients who received placebo, the overall frequency of TEAEs was 50.0 % in the older adults and 57.5 % in the younger adults (p = 0.531). The overall placebo-adjusted frequency of TEAEs was 27.5 % in older adults and 15.1 % in younger adults. The placebo-adjusted frequencies of the TEAEs dizziness, somnolence, headache, nausea, diplopia, blurred vision, and ataxia were ≥5 % higher, and frequencies of vomiting and vertigo were ≥2 % higher in older than younger adults. The overall frequency of TEAEs leading to discontinuation was 15.0 % in older ESL-treated patients and 17.6 % in younger ESL-treated patients (p = 0.647); the frequency increased with increasing ESL dose. For patients who received placebo, the overall frequency of TEAEs leading to discontinuation was 5.6 % in older adults and 6.6 % in younger adults (p = 0.847). In the non-epilepsy study pool, 30.2 % of patients (515/1705) were aged ≥60 years. The overall frequency of TEAEs was 56.9 % in older ESL-treated patients and 58.8 % in younger ESL-treated patients. The placebo-adjusted frequencies were 14.9 % in older and 15.1 % in younger ESL-treated patients. The placebo-adjusted frequencies of the TEAEs nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and vertigo were ≥2 % higher in older adults, whereas somnolence was ≥2 % higher in younger adults. The overall frequency of TEAEs leading to discontinuation was 18.3 % in older ESL-treated patients and 12.1 % in younger ESL-treated patients (p = 0.003); frequencies were not related to ESL dose. For patients who received placebo, the overall frequency of TEAEs leading to discontinuation was 8.0 % in older adults and 5.6 % in younger adults (p = 0.407).

CONCLUSION

Analyses of adverse event data support the safety and tolerability of ESL in adults aged ≥60 years. In the limited number of older patients with focal seizures taking ESL plus concomitant ASDs (n = 40), the frequency of TEAEs was generally higher than in younger adults. However, in the non-epilepsy patient group (in which the number of older patients was ten times larger; 427 patients taking ESL without concomitant ASDs), no marked age-related TEAE differences were observed, suggesting that increased ASD load associated with adjunctive therapy may complicate treatment selection in older patients, due to risk of increased adverse events. As is common practice for all ASDs, balancing clinical response and tolerability is needed in this vulnerable group of patients.

Cortical stimulation in pharmacoresistant focal epilepsies

Pharmacoresistance and adverse drug events designate a considerable group of patients with focal epilepsies that require alternative treatments such as neurosurgical intervention and neurostimulation. Electrical or magnetic stimulations of cortical brain areas for the treatment of pharmacoresistant focal epilepsies emerged from preclinical studies and experience through intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring in patients. Direct neurostimulation of seizure onset zones in neocortical brain areas may specifically affect neuronal networks involved in epileptiform activity without remarkable adverse influence on physiological cortical processing in immediate vicinity. Noninvasive low-frequency transcranial magnetic stimulation and cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation are suggested to be anticonvulsant; however, potential effects are ephemeral and require effect maintenance by ongoing stimulation. Invasive responsive neurostimulation, chronic subthreshold cortical stimulation, and epicranial cortical stimulation cover a broad range of different emerging technologies with intracranial and epicranial approaches that still have limited market access partly due to ongoing clinical development. Despite significant differences, the present bioelectronic technologies share common mode of actions with acute seizure termination by high-frequency stimulation and long-term depression induced by low-frequency magnetic or electrical stimulation or transcranial direct current stimulation.

Eslicarbazepine Acetate: A Review in Focal-Onset Seizures

Eslicarbazepine acetate (Zebinix^®), a voltage-gated sodium channel blocker, is a once-daily, orally administered anti-seizure medication available in the EU for use as monotherapy in adults with newly diagnosed focal-onset seizures and as adjunctive therapy in adults, adolescents and children aged > 6 years with focal-onset seizures. In adult patients, adjunctive eslicarbazepine acetate was generally associated with a significant decrease in seizure frequency and an increase in responder rate compared with placebo. The drug was also an effective monotherapy agent in adult patients, demonstrating noninferiority to controlled-release carbamazepine, in terms of seizure freedom rates. In paediatric patients, eslicarbazepine acetate provided seizure control when administered as adjunctive therapy, with the benefits appearing to be dependent on age and dose. The antiepileptic efficacy of eslicarbazepine acetate as adjunctive therapy or as monotherapy was maintained during longer-term extension studies, with each extension study period being up to 2 years. Oral eslicarbazepine acetate was generally well tolerated when administered as adjunctive therapy or monotherapy in adult patients and when administered as adjunctive therapy in paediatric patients, with most adverse events being of mild or moderate intensity. In conclusion, with the convenience of once-daily administration, eslicarbazepine acetate is an effective and generally well-tolerated treatment option for adults, adolescents and children aged > 6 years with focal-onset seizures.

[Pharmacoeconomic aspects of monotherapy of focal epilepsy]

AIM

To perform a clinical/economic comparison of monotherapy with antiepileptic drugs (AED) in patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy (FE) based on the results of previous studies.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The most common AEDs (carbamazepine (CBZ), oxcarbazepine (OXZ), lamotrigine (LTG), lacosamide (LCM)) were compared in patients, aged 16 years and over, with illness duration of five years.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

CBZ, OXZ and LCM can be used as monotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed FE. Monotherapy with LCM is associated with lowest costs for stopping focal seizures and the highest percentage of seizure-free patients. CBZ remains the most economical AED: the cost-effectiveness is minimal compared to all other AEDs used in the study. However, monotherapy with LCM is advisable if it is necessary to minimize side-effects in patients with newly diagnosed FE.

Understanding the challenge of comparative effectiveness research in focal epilepsy: A review of network meta-analyses and real-world evidence on antiepileptic drugs

OBJECTIVE

Head-to-head randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for assessing comparative treatment effects. In the absence of direct comparisons between all possible antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), however, clinical decision-making in focal (partial onset) epilepsy relies on alternative evidence borne from indirect comparisons including network meta-analyses (NMAs) and from real-world evidence (RWE) studies. We review NMAs and observational RWE studies comparing AEDs in the adjunctive setting to compare the robustness of these methods and to formulate recommendations for future evidence development.

METHODS

A literature review identified NMAs and RWE studies comparing AEDs for the adjunctive treatment of focal seizures published between January 2008 and October 2018. NMAs were evaluated for robustness using a framework based on guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Decision Support Unit and the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research. RWE studies were evaluated using the GRACE checklist.

RESULTS

From a total of 1993 records, 11 NMAs and six RWE studies were eligible. Key limitations identified in the NMAs include nonsystematic selection of RCTs, unexplored heterogeneity between included RCTs in terms of study and patient characteristics, and selection of AEDs and AED doses or dosing strategies that are not reflective of clinical practice. The main limitations of RWE studies concern sample size, design, and analysis methods. Approximately 90% of comparisons between individual AEDs were nonsignificant in the NMAs. None of the RWE studies adjusted for baseline differences between comparator groups; therefore, they lack the validity to make comparative conclusions.

SIGNIFICANCE

Current NMAs and RWE studies provide only nominal comparative evidence for AED treatments in focal epilepsy, and should be used with caution for decision-making due to their methodological limitations. To overcome these hurdles, adherence to methodological guidelines and concerted efforts to collect relevant outcome data in the real world are needed.

Adjunctive Cannabidiol in Patients with Dravet Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Safety

BACKGROUND

Dravet syndrome (DS) is one of the most severe forms of drug-resistant epilepsy and available interventions fail to control seizures in most patients. Cannabidiol (CBD) is the first in a new class of antiepileptic drugs with a distinctive chemical structure and mechanism of action.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of CBD as adjunctive treatment for seizures in patients with DS using meta-analytical techniques.

METHODS

We searched for randomized, placebo-controlled, single- or double-blinded trials. Main outcomes included ≥ 50% reduction in baseline convulsive seizure frequency and the incidence of treatment withdrawal and adverse events (AEs). Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were estimated through the inverse variance method.

RESULTS

Three trials were included involving 359 participants, 228 for CBD and 131 for placebo groups. In all trials, the active treatment was a plant-derived pharmaceutical formulation of purified CBD oral solution. The pooled RR for 50% response during the treatment was 1.69 (95% CI 1.21-2.36; p = 0.002). Across the trials, treatment was discontinued in 20 (9.0%) and 3 (2.3%) cases in the add-on CBD and placebo groups, respectively; the RR for CBD withdrawal was 3.12 (95% CI 1.07-9.10; p = 0.037). The RR to develop any AE during add-on CBD treatment was 1.06 (95% CI 0.87-1.28; p = 0.561). AEs significantly associated with adjunctive CBD were somnolence, decreased appetite, diarrhea, and increased serum aminotransferases.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjunctive CBD resulted in a greater reduction in convulsive seizure frequency than placebo and a higher rate of AEs in patients with DS presenting with seizures uncontrolled by concomitant antiepileptic therapy.

Pharmacodynamic interactions of antiepileptic drugs: From bench to clinical practice

BACKGROUND

Approximately 50% of patients do not achieve seizure control with antiepileptic drug (AED) monotherapy, and polytherapy, with more than one AED, is often required. To date, no evidence-based criteria on how to combine AEDs exist.

OBJECTIVE

This narrative review aimed to provide critical findings of the available literature about the role of pharmacodynamic AEDs' interactions in patients whose epilepsies were treated with polytherapy.

METHODS

Electronic databases, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE) and Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), were systematically searched to identify relevant studies on pharmacodynamic AEDs' interactions in patients with epilepsy.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Most data on AED combinations are coming from animal models and preclinical studies. Combining AEDs with different mechanisms of actions seems to have greater effectiveness and lower risk of adverse event development. Conversely, the combination of AEDs may cause pharmacodynamic synergistic effects that may result in not only increased efficacy but also more adverse effects. Despite some AED associations that have been proven to be effective in specific epilepsy/seizure type (e.g., phenobarbital+/phenytoin for tonic seizures and ethosiximide + valproate for absences; lamotrigine + valproate for various epilepsy/seizure types), no clear and definitive evidence exists about AED combinations in humans. Examples of pharmacodynamic interactions that possibly explain the synergistic effects on efficacy or adverse effects include the combination between vigabatrin or pregabalin and sodium channel blockers (supra-additive antiseizure effect) and lacosamide combined with other sodium channel blockers (infra-additive antiseizure effect and neurotoxicity synergistic). The pharmacodynamic lamotrigine-valproate interaction is also supported by synergistic adverse events. Therefore, well-designed double-blind prospective studies recruiting a sufficient number of patients possibly with a crossover design and carefully ascertain the role of pharmacokinetic interactions and variations of AEDs' levels in the blood are needed.

The adverse-effect profile of lacosamide

Introduction: Lacosamide has been used in epilepsy patients in the United States, Europe and Asia since it was approved by the FDA in 2008. Many patients have benefited from this drug as a new generation of sodium channel blocker. With the worldwide use of this drug, its adverse effects have gradually emerged, especially some rare adverse events.Areas covered: The present review aims to summarize the adverse effects of lacosamide reported in the literature in recent years to promote the safe clinical application of the drug.Expert opinion: In more than 10 years of experience in drug usage, adverse reactions of lacosamide have also been gradually discovered. The review showed that lacosamide is safe and effective in antiepileptic treatment, and its common side effects are dizziness, headache, drowsiness, diplopia, and cardiovascular abnormalities. Skin rashes, hematotoxicity and heart damage, psychological symptoms and suicide risk have also been reported and emphasized.

Adjunctive Cenobamate for Focal-Onset Seizures in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Cenobamate is a novel tetrazole-derived carbamate compound with a dual mechanism of action. This drug can enhance the inactivated state of voltage-gated sodium channels, preferentially inhibiting the persistent component of the sodium channel current, and acts as a positive allosteric modulator of GABA_A receptors, binding at a non-benzodiazepine site.

OBJECTIVE

We assessed the efficacy and safety of adjunctive cenobamate for the treatment of focal-onset seizures in adult patients with epilepsy using meta-analytical techniques.

METHODS

We systematically searched (May, week 4, 2020) MEDLINE (accessed by PubMed), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov ). There were no date limitations or language restrictions. Randomized, placebo-controlled, single or double-blinded, add-on trials of cenobamate in adult patients with uncontrolled focal-onset seizures were identified. Main outcomes included the proportion of patients with ≥ 50 and 100% reduction in seizure frequency during the maintenance treatment period compared with baseline and the incidence of treatment withdrawal and adverse events (AEs). Risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was estimated for each outcome.

RESULTS

Two trials were included, overall enrolling 659 patients (442 for the add-on cenobamate group and 217 for the add-on placebo group). Seizure frequency reduction by at least 50% occurred during the maintenance phase in 50.1% of the patients randomized to cenobamate and 23.5% of the placebo-treated participants (RR 2.18, 95% CI 1.67-2.85; p < 0.001). The pooled estimated RR to achieve seizure freedom for the cenobamate group in comparison with placebo was 3.71 (95% CI 1.93-7.14; p < 0.001). Withdrawal from randomized treatment occurred in 16.7 and 11.1% of participants receiving cenobamate and placebo, respectively (RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.85-2.09; p = 0.205). Treatment was discontinued due to AEs in 12.2 and 4.1% of the patients in the active and control arms (RR 2.27, 95% CI 1.08-4.79; p = 0.031). AEs were reported in 76.9 and 66.8% of the patients during treatment with cenobamate and placebo (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02-1.26; p = 0.021). The cenobamate-associated AEs included somnolence, dizziness, fatigue, balance disorder, and diplopia.

CONCLUSIONS

Adjunctive cenobamate in adult patients with uncontrolled focal-onset seizures is associated with a greater reduction in seizure frequency and a higher rate of AEs than placebo.