Reappraisal of the Medical Research Council Antiepileptic Drug Withdrawal Study: contamination‐adjusted and dose‐response re‐analysis

Medical and neurologic management of brain tumor patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article discusses commonly encountered medical and neurological complications in patients with brain tumors and highlights recommendations for their management based on updated evidence.

RECENT FINDINGS

Use of dexamethasone is correlated with worse prognosis in patients with glioblastoma, and in brain metastases, high doses may lead to increased side effects without additional clinical benefit. There are multiple antiseizure medications (ASM) to choose from and possible interactions and toxicity must be considered when choosing an agent. Additionally, there is growing interest in the use of AMPA receptor blockers as ASM in patients with brain tumors. Nonpharmacological strategies for the management of fatigue remain paramount. Cognitive decline is common after whole brain radiation (WBRT) and hippocampal-sparing WBRT results in superior cognitive outcomes. Venous thromboembolism is a common complication and there is growing evidence on the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in this population.

SUMMARY

There is evolving evidence on the management of medical and neurological complications in patients with brain tumors. These complications, require early identification and multidisciplinary collaboration and expertise.

Discontinuation of Antiseizure Medications in Patients With Brain Tumors

Patients with brain tumors will experience seizures during their disease course. While providers can use antiseizure medications to control these events, patients with brain tumors can experience side effects, ranging from mild to severe, from these medications. Providers in subspecialties such as neurology, neuro-oncology, neurosurgery, radiation oncology, and medical oncology often work with patients with brain tumor to balance seizure control and the adverse toxicity of antiseizure medications. In this study, we sought to explore the problem of brain tumor-related seizures/epilepsy in the context of how and when to consider antiseizure medication discontinuation. Moreover, we thoroughly evaluate the literature on antiseizure medication discontinuation for adult and pediatric patients and highlight recommendations relevant to patients with both brain tumors and seizures.

Variation in seizure risk increases from antiseizure medication withdrawal among patients with well-controlled epilepsy: A pooled analysis

OBJECTIVE

Guidelines suggest considering antiseizure medication (ASM) discontinuation in seizure-free patients with epilepsy. Past work has poorly explored how discontinuation effects vary between patients. We evaluated (1) what factors modify the influence of discontinuation on seizure risk; and (2) the range of seizure risk increase due to discontinuation across low- versus high-risk patients.

METHODS

We pooled three datasets including seizure-free patients who did and did not discontinue ASMs. We conducted time-to-first-seizure analyses. First, we evaluated what individual patient factors modified the relative effect of ASM discontinuation on seizure risk via interaction terms. Then, we assessed the distribution of 2-year risk increase as predicted by our adjusted logistic regressions.

RESULTS

We included 1626 patients, of whom 678 (42%) planned to discontinue all ASMs. The mean predicted 2-year seizure risk was 43% [95% confidence interval (CI) 39%-46%] for discontinuation versus 21% (95% CI 19%-24%) for continuation. The mean 2-year absolute seizure risk increase was 21% (95% CI 18%-26%). No individual interaction term was significant after correcting for multiple comparisons. The median [interquartile range (IQR)] risk increase across patients was 19% (IQR 14%-24%; range 7%-37%). Results were unchanged when restricting analyses to only the two RCTs.

SIGNIFICANCE

No single patient factor significantly modified the influence of discontinuation on seizure risk, although we captured how absolute risk increases change for patients that are at low versus high risk. Patients should likely continue ASMs if even a 7% 2-year increase in the chance of any more seizures would be too much and should likely discontinue ASMs if even a 37% risk increase would be too little. In between these extremes, individualized risk calculation and a careful understanding of patient preferences are critical. Future work will further develop a two-armed individualized seizure risk calculator and contextualize seizure risk thresholds below which to consider discontinuation.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Understanding how much antiseizure medications (ASMs) decrease seizure risk is an important part of determining which patients with epilepsy should be treated, especially for patients who have not had a seizure in a while. We found that there was a wide range in the amount that ASM discontinuation increases seizure risk-between 7% and 37%. We found that no single patient factor modified that amount. Understanding what a patient's seizure risk might be if they discontinued versus continued ASM treatment is critical to making informed decisions about whether the benefit of treatment outweighs the downsides.

Video-EEG-monitoring to guide antiseizure medication withdrawal

BACKGROUND

Discontinuing anti-seizure medication (ASM) should be considered in persons with epilepsy with long-term seizure freedom. Clinicians should also pursue ASM withdrawal in persons with one-time seizures without increased recurrence risk and those with suspected non-epileptic events. However, ASM withdrawal is associated with the risk of recurring seizures. Monitored ASM withdrawal in an epilepsy monitoring unit (EMU) could help better evaluate the risk of seizure recurrence. Here, we investigate the practice of EMU-guided ASM withdrawal, assess its indications, and aim to determine positive and negative predictors for successful withdrawal.

METHODS

We screened the medical records of all patients admitted to our EMU between November 1, 2019, and October 31, 2021, and included patients of at least 18 years admitted with the aim of permanent ASM withdrawal. We defined four groups of withdrawal indications: (1) long-term seizure freedom; (2) suspected non-epileptic events; (3) history of epileptic seizures but not fulfilling diagnostic criteria of epilepsy; and (4) seizure-freedom after epilepsy surgery. Successful withdrawal was defined according to the following criteria: no recoding of (sub)clinical seizure activity during VEM (groups 1, 2, and 3), patients did not meet the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) definition of epilepsy (groups 2 and 3) [14], and patients were discharged without ongoing ASM treatment (all groups). We also evaluated the prediction model by Lamberink et al. (LPM) for the risk of seizure recurrence in groups 1 and 3.

RESULTS

55/651 (8.6%) patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Withdrawal indications were distributed as follows; group 1: 2/55 (3.6%); group 2: 44/55 (80%); group 3: 9/55 (16,4%); group 4: 0/55. Overall, ASM withdrawal was successful in 90.9%. The sensitivity of the LPM for a 2-year 50% relapse risk threshold was 75%, the specificity 33.3%; for a 5-year relapse risk respectively 12.5% and 33.3%, suggesting that the model is not suitable for risk assessment in patients with one-time seizures or acute-symptomatic seizures, who constituted most of the evaluated patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that EMU-guided ASM withdrawal could be a helpful tool to support clinical decision-making and improve patient safety. Prospective, randomized trials should further evaluate this method in the future.

Should antiseizure medications be withdrawn after an extended period of seizure freedom in individuals with adult-onset epilepsy?

Unlike several epilepsies with onset in pediatric age, adult-onset epilepsies do not typically have a time course that is predictably self-remitting in the large majority of people. Still, about one-half of individuals with adult-onset epilepsy who have been seizure-free for an extended period (two years or longer) on antiseizure medications (ASMs) will remain in remission when their drug therapy is discontinued. Although a number of predictors of outcome have been identified (including specific adult-onset syndromes associated with a low probability of spontaneous remission), in most cases, the only way to establish whether the epilepsy has remitted in a given individual is to gradually withdraw ASMs. ASM withdrawal can be beneficial, particularly when the currently used treatment is not well tolerated, or could lead to adverse outcomes in the future (i.e., teratogenic effects should pregnancy occur in a female of childbearing potential). However, the risks associated with ASM withdrawal are significant. Relapse of seizures can have major adverse psychosocial consequences and also may carry a risk of morbidity and mortality. Most importantly, evidence suggests that in about 20% of individuals whose seizure relapsed following ASM withdrawal, re-institution of pharmacological therapy may not readily restore seizure control. Ultimately, management decisions should prioritize the preference of the well-informed person with epilepsy. Particularly, when adverse drug effects are a concern, options to be discussed should include not only withdrawal or continuation of the current treatment but also dose reduction or substitution with a different ASM.

The sense of stopping migraine prophylaxis

INTRODUCTION

Migraine prophylactic therapy has changed over recent years with the development and approval of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway. As new therapies emerged, leading headache societies have been providing guidelines on the initiation and escalation of such therapies. However, there is a lack of robust evidence looking at the duration of successful prophylaxis and the effects of therapy discontinuation. In this narrative review we explore both the biological and clinical rationale for prophylactic therapy discontinuation to provide a basis for clinical decision-making.

METHODS

Three different literature search strategies were conducted for this narrative review. These include i) stopping rules in comorbidities of migraine in which overlapping preventives are prescribed, notably depression and epilepsy; ii) stopping rules of oral treatment and botox; iii) stopping rules of antibodies targeting the CGRP (receptor). Keywords were utilized in the following databases: Embase, Medline ALL, Web of Science Core collection, Cochran Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar.

DISCUSSION

Reasons to guide decision-making in stopping prophylactic migraine therapies include adverse events, efficacy failure, drug holiday following long-term administration, and patient-specific reasons. Certain guidelines contain both positive and negative stopping rules. Following withdrawal of migraine prophylaxis, migraine burden may return to pre-treatment level, remain unchanged, or lie somewhere in-between. The current suggestion to discontinue CGRP(-receptor) targeted mAbs after 6 to 12 months is based on expert opinion, as opposed to robust scientific evidence. Current guidelines advise the clinician to assess the success of CGRP(-receptor) targeted mAbs after three months. Based on excellent tolerability data and the absence of scientific data, we propose if no other reasons apply, to stop the use of mAbs when the number of migraine days decreases to four or fewer migraine days per month. There is a higher likelihood of developing side effects with oral migraine preventatives, and so we suggest stopping these drugs according to the national guidelines if they are well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Translational and basic studies are warranted to investigate the long-term effects of a preventive drug after its discontinuation, starting from what is known about the biology of migraine. In addition, observational studies and, eventually, clinical trials focusing on the effect of discontinuation of migraine prophylactic therapies, are essential to substantiate evidence-based recommendations on stopping rules for both oral preventives and CGRP(-receptor) targeted therapies in migraine.