Seizure freedom as an outcome in epilepsy treatment clinical trials

Cognitive behavioral therapy in adults with functional seizures: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) investigating cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) among adults with functional seizures (FS) have become increasingly available, prompting the opportunity to critically appraise the efficacy and safety of CBT in this population.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis including RCTs comparing CBT in addition to standardized medical treatment (SMT) versus SMT alone for adults with FS. The primary outcome was seizure freedom at the end of treatment. Secondary outcomes included measures of quality of life, anxiety and depression assessed via standardized clinical questionnaires.

RESULTS

Three RCTs were included comprising 228 participants treated with CBT and 222 with SMT. The intervention was significantly associated with seizure freedom (Odds Ratio [OR] 1.98; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.14, 3.46; p = 0.02; I2 = 0 %), reductions in anxiety (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.21; 95 % CI -0.41, -0.003; p = 0.047; I2 = 0 %) and improvements in quality of life (SMD 0.34; 95 % CI 0.12, 0.57; p = 0.003; I2 = 0 %) at the end of treatment. Conversely, no significant differences between groups were observed in depression symptoms (SMD -0.19; 95 % CI -0.39, 0.02; p = 0.08; I2 = 0 %). There was no statistically significant increase in the risk of suicidal ideation and self-harm with CBT (OR 2.11; 95 % CI 0.81, 5.48; p = 0.13; I2 = 0 %) nor were there differences in terms of discontinuation rates during follow-up (OR 0.92; 95 % CI 0.49, 1.72; p = 0.79; I2 = 7 %).

CONCLUSIONS

There is high-quality evidence supporting the efficacy and safety of CBT in treating FS. Future research should investigate whether combining CBT with other therapeutic methods could potentially enhance treatment efficacy.

Development of an International Standard Set of Outcomes and Measurement Methods for Routine Practice for Adults with Epilepsy: The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement Consensus Recommendations

At present, there is no internationally accepted set of core outcomes or measurement methods for epilepsy clinical practice. Therefore, the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) convened an international working group of experts in epilepsy, people with epilepsy and their representatives to develop minimum sets of standardized outcomes and outcomes measurement methods for clinical practice that support patient-clinician decision-making and quality improvement. Consensus methods identified 20 core outcomes. Measurement tools were recommended based on their evidence of strong clinical measurement properties, feasibility, and cross-cultural applicability. The essential outcomes included many non-seizure outcomes: anxiety, depression, suicidality, memory and attention, sleep quality, functional status, and the social impact of epilepsy. The proposed set will facilitate the implementation of the use of patient-centered outcomes in daily practice, ensuring holistic care. They also encourage harmonization of outcome measurement, and if widely implemented should reduce the heterogeneity of outcome measurement, accelerate comparative research, and facilitate quality improvement efforts.

Effectiveness of Seizure Dogs for People With Severe Refractory Epilepsy: Results From the EPISODE Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether people living with severe medically refractory epilepsy (PSRE) benefit from a seizure dog.

METHODS

An individual-level stepped-wedge randomized controlled trial was conducted. The study was conducted in the Netherlands among adults with daily to weekly seizures. All participants were included simultaneously (on June 1, 2019) while receiving usual care. Then, during the 36-month follow-up, they received a seizure dog in a randomized sequence. Participants kept a seizure diary and completed 3-monthly surveys. Seizure frequency was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included seizure-free days, seizure severity, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and well-being. Data were analyzed using generalized linear mixed modeling (GLMM). The models assumed a delayed intervention effect, starting when the seizure dog reached an advanced stage of training. Effects were calculated as changes per 28-day period with the intervention.

RESULTS

Data were collected from 25 participants, of whom 20 crossed over to the intervention condition. The median follow-up was 19 months with usual care and 12 months with the intervention. On average, participants experienced 115 (SD 164) seizures per 28-day period in the usual care condition and 73 (SD 131) seizures in the intervention condition. Seven participants achieved a reduction of 50% or more at the end of follow-up. GLMM indicated a 3.1% decrease in seizure frequency for each consecutive 28-day period with the intervention (0.969, 95% CI 0.960-0.977). Furthermore, an increase in the number of seizure-free days was observed (1.012, 95% CI 1.009, 1.015), but no effect on seizure severity measured with the NHS3. Generic HRQoL scores improved, as reflected in the decrease in EQ-5D-5L utility decrement (0.975, 95% CI 0.954-0.997). Smaller improvements were observed on overall self-rated HRQoL, epilepsy-specific HRQoL, and well-being, measured with the EQ VAS, QOLIE-31-P, and ICECAP-A, respectively.

DISCUSSION

Seizure dogs reduce seizure frequency, increase the number of seizure-free days, and improve the quality of life of PSRE. The magnitude of the effect on generic HRQoL indicates that seizure dogs benefit PSRE beyond the impact on seizure frequency alone. Early discontinuation of seizure dog partnerships suggests that this intervention is not suitable for all PSRE and requires further study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION

This study was registered in the Dutch Trial Register (NL6682) on November 28, 2017. Participants were enrolled on June 1, 2019.

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

This study provides Class III evidence that seizure dogs are associated with a decrease in seizure frequency in adult patients with medically refractory epilepsy.

Measuring Real-Time Medication Effects From Electroencephalography

PURPOSE

Evaluating the effects of antiseizure medication (ASM) on patients with epilepsy remains a slow and challenging process. Quantifiable noninvasive markers that are measurable in real-time and provide objective and useful information could guide clinical decision-making. We examined whether the effect of ASM on patients with epilepsy can be quantitatively measured in real-time from EEGs.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis was conducted on 67 patients in the long-term monitoring unit at Boston Children's Hospital. Two 30-second EEG segments were selected from each patient premedication and postmedication weaning for analysis. Nonlinear measures including entropy and recurrence quantitative analysis values were computed for each segment and compared before and after medication weaning.

RESULTS

Our study found that ASM effects on the brain were measurable by nonlinear recurrence quantitative analysis on EEGs. Highly significant differences ( P < 1e-11) were found in several nonlinear measures within the seizure zone in response to antiseizure medication. Moreover, the size of the medication effect correlated with a patient's seizure frequency, seizure localization, number of medications, and reported seizure frequency reduction on medication.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings show the promise of digital biomarkers to measure medication effects and epileptogenicity.

Efficacy and Safety of Brivaracetam in Persons With Epilepsy in a Real-World Setting: A Prospective, Non-Interventional Study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Epilepsy stands out as one of the most prevalent neurological conditions. Brivaracetam (BRV) is a noteworthy antiseizure medication (ASM) distinguished by its pronounced and selective interaction with the synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A) within the brain. Prior investigations, including regulatory trials, post-marketing assessments, and comparative meta-analyses, have consistently underscored BRV's equivalency in efficacy and superior tolerability when pitted against other antiseizure drugs. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and acceptability of BRV in treating epileptic patients in the Pakistani population.

METHODS

This prospective observational study, conducted in Pakistan from February to December 2022, employed a non-probability consecutive sampling technique. This study included 368 adult patients diagnosed with epilepsy, with a focus on those aged 18 and above experiencing focal seizures. Demographic data, clinical history, seizure types, and epilepsy profiles were recorded. Patients were administered BRV (Brivera; manufactured by Helix Pharma Pvt Ltd., Sindh, Pakistan) monotherapy therapy under physician guidance and followed up for three months. The study assessed changes in seizure frequency, side effects, and drug resistance at baseline, 14th day, and 90th day. Safety aspects were monitored, including documenting any adverse effects associated with BRV therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 368 epileptic patients were included in this study, of which 287 (61.3%) were males and 181 (38.7%) were females. The mean age was 32.91±17.11 years. The mean number of seizures at the baseline visit was 5.74±6.21, at 14 days was 2.89±3.84 and at 90 days was 1.73±5.01 (p<0.001). Overall, a more than 50% reduction in seizure episodes was achieved in 178 (56.3%) patients at day 90, and less than 50% reduction in seizure episodes was achieved by 95 (26.8%) patients on Day 14, with a highly significant association between them (p<0.001). Among 316 patients, only 41 (4.4%) of all BRV-treated patients experienced adverse events; Of these 41 patients, 17 (41.7%) reported dizziness and 14(34.2%) reported behavioral issues.

CONCLUSIONS

Epileptic patients receiving BRV demonstrated a substantial reduction of greater than 50% seizure episodes at the end of follow-up visits. Moreover, BRV exhibited fewer adverse effects in individuals with epilepsy.

Synergistic effects of vagus nerve stimulation and antiseizure medication

INTRODUCTION

Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is an effective, non-pharmacological therapy for epileptic seizures. Until now, favorable combinations of different groups of antiseizure medication (ASM) and VNS have not been sufficiently addressed. The aim of this study was to identify the synergistic effects between VNS and different ASMs.

METHODS

We performed an observational study of patients with epilepsy who were implanted with VNS and had a stable ASM therapy during the first 2 years after the VNS implantation. Data were collected from the Mainz Epilepsy Registry. The efficacy of VNS depending on the concomitantly used ASM group/individual ASMs was assessed by quantifying the responder rate (≥ 50% seizure reduction compared to the time of VNS implantation) and seizure freedom (absence of seizures during the last 6 months of the observation period).

RESULTS

One hundred fifty one patients (mean age 45.2 ± 17.0 years, 78 females) were included in the study. Regardless of the used ASM, the responder rate in the whole cohort was 50.3% and the seizure freedom was 13.9%. Multiple regression analysis showed that combination of VNS with synaptic vesicle glycoprotein (SV2A) modulators (responder rate 64.0%, seizure freedom 19.8%) or slow sodium channel inhibitors (responder rate 61.8%, seizure freedom 19.7%) was associated with a statistically significant better responder rate and seizure freedom than combinations of VNS and ASM with other mechanism of action. Within these ASM groups, brivaracetam showed a more favorable effect than levetiracetam, whereas lacosamide and eslicarbazepine were comparable in their effects.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that the combination of VNS with ASMs belonging to either SV2A modulators or slow sodium channel inhibitors could be optimal to achieve a better seizure control following VNS. However, these preliminary data require further validation under controlled conditions.

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.

Impact of epilepsy and its treatment on brain metastasis from solid tumors: A retrospective study

Introduction

Retrospective observational study on medical records of patients with epilepsy related brain metastases (BM) to evaluate efficacy, safety and possible interaction with cancer treatment of different anti-seizure medications (ASMs) and the risk of seizures.

Materials and methods

We consecutively reviewed all medical records of epilepsy-related BM patients from 2010 to 2020 who were followed for at least one month at the Brain Tumour-related Epilepsy Center of the IRCCS Regina Elena National Cancer Institute Rome, Italy.

Results

We selected 111 cancer patients. Of these, only 42 had at least undergone a second neurological examination. In the whole population, 95 (85.2%) had seizures and 16 patients had no seizures (14.4%). The most frequently first ASM prescribed was LEV (40.5%). We observed a significant correlation between tumor site and probability of having seizures, but not between seizure type and age (>65 or <65 years). Among 42 patients, 26 were administered levetiracetam, followed by oxcarbazepine. Until the last follow-up, 19 never changed the first ASM, maintained the same dosage and remained seizure free. After a median of 7 months, 16 (38.1%) required changes in therapeutic treatment due to inefficacy. At the last follow-up, 24 patients (57.1%) were seizure free. Eighteen patients (42.8%) never achieved freedom from seizures despite had at least 2 therapy changes. Two patients changed ASM due to adverse events and 1 to phenobarbital owing to the interaction with cancer treatment. The mean daily dose of first ASM in all 42 patients was very close to the Defined Daily Dose (DDD).

Conclusion

In BM patients seizure incidence could be underestimated; a team evaluation performed by oncologist and neurologist together, could guarantee an accurate taking care of both oncological illness and epilepsy, in this fragile patient population. More than 50% of our patients respond to monotherapy with new generation ASMs. Furthermore we deemed in patients receiving chemotherapy the choice of ASM should consider possible interactions with antitumor therapies, for this reason newer generation ASMs should be the preferred choice. It is necessary to get close to the DDD before considering an ASM ineffective in seizure control.

Onset of efficacy and adverse events during Cenobamate titration period

OBJECTIVES

Cenobamate is an antiseizure medication (ASM) approved in Europe as adjunctive therapy for adults with inadequately controlled focal seizures. This post hoc analysis reports onset of efficacy and characterizes time to onset, duration, and severity of the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) during cenobamate titration.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Adult patients with uncontrolled focal seizures taking 1 to 3 concomitant ASMs were randomized to receive adjunctive cenobamate or placebo (double-blind studies C013 and C017) or cenobamate (open-label study C021). Outcome assessments included efficacy (median percentage change in seizure frequency and onset [studies C013 and C017]) and safety (onset, duration, and severity of TEAEs [all studies]).

RESULTS

Onset of efficacy was observed by Weeks 1 to 4 of titration in studies C013 and C017 which used a faster titration schedule than study CO21. In study C013, the median percentage seizure frequency reduction was 36.7% in patients receiving cenobamate versus 16.3% in those taking placebo (p = .002); in study C017, significant differences in seizure frequency emerged in Week 1 and continued throughout titration between all cenobamate groups and placebo (p < .001). The most commonly reported TEAEs were somnolence, dizziness, fatigue, and headache, with first onset of each reported as early as Week 1; however, the majority resolved.

CONCLUSIONS

Reductions in seizure frequency occurred during titration with initial efficacy observed prior to reaching the target dose. These reductions were regarded as clinically meaningful because they may indicate early efficacy at lower doses than previously expected and had a considerable impact on patient quality of life. Long-term treatment with adjunctive cenobamate was generally safe and well-tolerated.

Indirect treatment comparison of cenobamate to other ASMs for the treatment of uncontrolled focal seizures

OBJECTIVE

The efficacy and safety of cenobamate relative to other antiseizure medications (ASMs) has not been evaluated. An indirect treatment comparison (network meta-analysis) was performed to determine if adjunctive cenobamate increases the odds ratio (OR) for ≥50% responder rate or for withdrawals due to treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) leading to ASM discontinuation versus adjunctive therapy with other ASMs.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted to identify randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (maintenance phase ≥ 12 weeks) assessing adjunctive ASMs in adults with uncontrolled focal seizures. Cenobamate was compared to a group of seven other ASMs, and to subgroups of branded (brivaracetam, eslicarbazepine acetate, lacosamide, and perampanel) and older (lamotrigine, levetiracetam, and topiramate) ASMs at FDA-recommended daily maintenance doses (FDA-RDMD), at all doses, and at maximum and minimum daily doses. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

Twenty-one studies were eligible for analysis. The placebo-adjusted ≥ 50% responder rate for FDA-RDMD of cenobamate was superior (OR 4.200; 95% CI 2.279, 7.742) to FDA-RDMD of all seven assessed (OR 2.202 95% CI 1.915, 2.532; p = 0.044) and branded ASMs (OR 2.148; 95% CI 1.849, 2.494; p = 0.037). There was no significant difference for ≥50% responder rate between FDA-RDMD of cenobamate and FDA-RDMD of older ASMs (OR 2.617; 95% CI 1.767, 3.878; p = 0.202). No significant differences were identified for ≥50% responder rate when comparing all doses and maximum/minimum doses of cenobamate to all seven, branded, and older ASMs. Cenobamate demonstrated comparable TEAE withdrawal rates to all seven ASMs, branded ASMs, and older ASMs across each of the four dose ranges (all p > 0.05).

SIGNIFICANCE

Patients receiving FDA-RDMD of cenobamate were more likely to have ≥50% seizure reduction compared with FDA-RDMD of the seven assessed ASMs and branded ASMs, without an increase in treatment discontinuation due to TEAEs.

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.