A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of adjunctive carisbamate treatment in patients with partial-onset seizures

Lennox-Gastaut Syndrome: Current Treatments, Novel Therapeutics, and Future Directions

Lennox-Gastaut syndrome is a severe drug-resistant developmental and epileptic encephalopathy with slow spike and wave on EEG (DEE-SSW) composing about 1-2% of epilepsy patients. Seizures in DEE-SSW are caused by a variety of etiologies, and there is a large unmet treatment need as seizures are usually treatment-resistant and individuals are often unable to function independently. The updated definition by the International League Against Epilepsy has established formal diagnostic criteria allowing for more uniform diagnosis. This article provides a review of typical medication management and treatment strategies, including new and developing surgical approaches. Future directions in treatment include expanding genetic testing with the potential for gene therapy and continuously improving surgical options with the goal to prevent progression to DEE-SSW.

Carisbamate add-on therapy for drug-resistant focal epilepsy

BACKGROUND

Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological disorders. Many people with epilepsy are drug-resistant and require add-on therapy, meaning that they concomitantly take multiple antiepileptic drugs. Carisbamate is a drug which is taken orally and inhibits voltage-gated sodium channels. Carisbamate may be useful for drug-resistant focal epilepsy.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of carisbamate when used as an add-on therapy for drug-resistant focal epilepsy.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases on 8 April 2021: Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE (Ovid) 1946 to April 07, 2021. CRS Web includes randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO ICTRP, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the specialised registers of Cochrane review groups including Epilepsy. We also searched ongoing trials registers, checked reference lists, and contacted authors of the included trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Double-blind randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing carisbamate versus placebo or another antiepileptic drug, as add-on therapy for drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Trials could have a parallel-group or cross-over design.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected the trials for inclusion, assessed trial quality, and extracted data. The primary outcome was 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency (responder rate). The secondary outcomes were: seizure freedom, treatment withdrawal (for any reason and due to adverse events); adverse events, and quality of life. We analysed data using the Mantel-Haenszel statistical method and according to the intention-to-treat population. We presented results as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

MAIN RESULTS

We included four RCTs involving a total of 2211 participants. All four trials compared carisbamate with placebo for drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Participants in all trials were over 16 years of age and received at least one other antiepileptic drug concomitantly. We detected substantial risk of bias across the included trials. All four trials were at high risk of attrition bias due to the incomplete reporting of attrition and the high treatment withdrawal rates noted, especially with higher doses. All four trials also had unclear risk of detection bias, as they did not specify whether outcome assessors were blinded. Meta-analysis suggested that carisbamate produced a higher responder rate compared to placebo (RR 1.36, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.62; 4 studies; moderate-certainty evidence). More participants in the carsibamate group achieved seizure freedom (RR 2.43, 95% CI 0.84 to 7.03; 1 study); withdrew from treatment for any reason (RR 1.32, 95% CI 0.82 to 2.12; 4 studies); and withdrew from treatment due to adverse events (RR 1.80, 95% CI 0.78 to 4.17; 4 studies) than in the placebo group. However, the evidence for the three outcomes was very low-certainty. There was no difference between treatment groups for the proportion of participants experiencing at least one adverse event (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.30; 2 studies; low-certainty evidence). More participants in the carisbamate group than in the placebo group developed dizziness (RR 2.06, 95% CI 1.23 to 3.44; 4 studies; very low-certainty evidence) and somnolence (RR 1.82, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.58; 4 studies; low-certainty evidence), but not fatigue (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.68; 3 studies); headache (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.38; 4 studies); or nausea (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.75; 3 studies). None of the included trials reported quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that carisbamate may demonstrate efficacy and tolerability as an add-on therapy for drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Importantly, the evidence for all outcomes except responder rate was of low to very low certainty, therefore we are uncertain of the accuracy of the reported effects. The certainty of the evidence is limited by the significant risk of bias associated with the included studies, as well as the statistical heterogeneity detected for some outcomes. Consequently, it is difficult for these findings to inform clinical practice. The studies were all of short duration and only included adult study populations. There is a need for further RCTs with more clear methodology, long-term follow-up, more clinical outcomes, more seizure types, and a broader range of participants.

Therapeutic Effects of Time-Limited Treatment with Brivaracetam on Posttraumatic Epilepsy after Fluid Percussion Injury in the Rat

Mounting evidence suggests the synaptic vesicle glycoprotein 2A (SV2A) targeted by levetiracetam may contribute to epileptogenesis. Levetiracetam has shown anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, neuroprotective, and possible antiepileptogenic effects in brain injury and seizure/epilepsy models, and a phase 2 study has signaled a possible clinical antiepileptogenic effect. Brivaracetam shows greater affinity and specificity for SV2A than levetiracetam and broader preclinical antiseizure effects. Thus, we assessed the antiepileptogenic/disease-modifying potential of brivaracetam in an etiologically realistic rat posttraumatic epilepsy model optimized for efficient drug testing. Brivaracetam delivery protocols were designed to maintain clinical moderate-to-high plasma levels in young (5-week-old) male Sprague-Dawley rats for 4 weeks. Treatment protocols were rapidly screened in 4-week experiments using small groups of animals to ensure against rigorous testing of futile treatment protocols. The antiepileptogenic effects of brivaracetam treatment initiated 30 minutes, 4 hours, and 8 hours after rostral parasagittal fluid percussion injury (rpFPI) were then compared with vehicle-treated controls in a fully powered blind and randomized 16-week validation. Seizures were evaluated by video-electrocorticography using a 5-electrode epidural montage. Endpoint measures included incidence, frequency, duration, and spread of seizures. Group sizes and recording durations were supported by published power analyses. Three months after treatment ended, rats treated with brivaracetam starting at 4 hours post-FPI (the best-performing protocol) experienced a 38% decrease in overall incidence of seizures, 59% decrease in seizure frequency, 67% decrease in time spent seizing, and a 45% decrease in the proportion of spreading seizures that was independent of duration-based seizure definition. Thus, brivaracetam shows both antiepileptogenic and disease-modifying properties after rpFPI. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: The rpFPI model, which likely incorporates epileptogenic mechanisms operating after human head injury, can be used to efficiently screen investigational treatment protocols and assess antiepileptogenic/disease-modifying effects. Our studies 1) support a role for SV2A in epileptogenesis, 2) suggest that brivaracetam and other drugs targeting SV2A should be considered for human clinical trials of prevention of post-traumatic epilepsy after head injury, and 3) provide data to inform the design of treatment protocols for clinical trials.

Qualification and application of liquid chromatography-quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometric method for the determination of carisbamate in rat plasma and prediction of its human pharmacokinetics using physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling

Carisbamate is an antiepileptic drug and it also has broad neuroprotective activity and anticonvulsant reaction. In this study, a liquid chromatography-quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometric (LC-qTOF-MS) method was developed and applied for the determination of carisbamate in rat plasma to support in vitro and in vivo studies. A quadratic regression (weighted 1/concentration²), with an equation y = ax² + bx + c, was used to fit calibration curves over the concentration range from 9.05 to 6,600 ng/mL for carisbamate in rat plasma. Preclinical in vitro and in vivo studies of carisbamate have been studied through the developed bioanalytical method. Based on these study results, human pharmacokinetic (PK) profile has been predicted using physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling. The PBPK model was optimized and validated by using the in vitro and in vivo data. The human PK of carisbamate after oral dosing of 750 mg was simulated by using this validated PBPK model. The human PK parameters and profiles predicted from the validated PBPK model were similar to the clinical data. This PBPK model developed from the preclinical data for carisbamate would be useful for predicting the PK of carisbamate in various clinical settings.

The safety of medications used to treat peripheral neuropathic pain, part 1 (antidepressants and antiepileptics): review of double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Peripheral neuropathic pain is a highly disabling condition for patients and a challenge for neurologists and pain physicians. Although many drugs have been assessed in scientific studies, few have demonstrated a clear clinical efficacy against neuropathic pain. Moreover, the paucity of data regarding their safety raised the question on the benefit-risk ratio when used in patients experiencing peripheral neuropathies.

AREAS COVERED

The authors conducted a review of double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials to assess the safety of medications used to treat neuropathic pain. This first review was focused on antidepressant and antiepileptic medications. The aim was to provide an overview of the treatment-emergent adverse events (≥10%) and the serious adverse effects described in clinical trials.

EXPERT OPINION

Among antiepileptics and antidepressants, duloxetine appeared to have the most detailed safety for the treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain. Over all studies, the most commonly reported adverse effects were dizziness, drowsiness, nausea, and constipation. Only 20.0% of the included studies (N = 90) presented a good description of adverse effects that included a statistical comparison vers usa placebo group. Important methodological improvements must be made to improve the assessment of medication safety in future clinical trials.

Does accounting for seizure frequency variability increase clinical trial power?

OBJECTIVE

Seizure frequency variability is associated with placebo responses in randomized controlled trials (RCT). Increased variability can result in drug misclassification and, hence, decreased statistical power. We investigated a new method that directly incorporated variability into RCT analysis, Z_V.

METHODS

Two models were assessed: the traditional 50%-responder rate (RR50), and the variability-corrected score, Z_V. Each predicted seizure frequency upper and lower limits using prior seizures. Accuracy was defined as percentage of time-intervals when the observed seizure frequencies were within the predicted limits. First, we tested the Z_V method on three datasets (SeizureTracker: n=3016, Human Epilepsy Project: n=107, and NeuroVista: n=15). An additional independent SeizureTracker validation dataset was used to generate a set of 200 simulated trials each for 5 different sample sizes (total N=100 to 500 by 100), assuming 20% dropout and 30% drug efficacy. "Power" was determined as the percentage of trials successfully distinguishing placebo from drug (p<0.05).

RESULTS

Prediction accuracy across datasets was, Z_V: 91-100%, RR50: 42-80%. Simulated RCT Z_V analysis achieved >90% power at N=100 per arm while RR50 required N=200 per arm.

SIGNIFICANCE

Z_V may increase the statistical power of an RCT relative to the traditional RR50.

Carisbamate blockade of T-type voltage-gated calcium channels

OBJECTIVES

Carisbamate (CRS) is a novel monocarbamate compound that possesses antiseizure and neuroprotective properties. However, the mechanisms underlying these actions remain unclear. Here, we tested both direct and indirect effects of CRS on several cellular systems that regulate intracellular calcium concentration [Ca²⁺ ]_i .

METHODS

We used a combination of cellular electrophysiologic techniques, as well as cell viability, Store Overload-Induced Calcium Release (SOICR), and mitochondrial functional assays to determine whether CRS might affect [Ca²⁺ ]_i levels through actions on the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), mitochondria, and/or T-type voltage-gated Ca²⁺ channels.

RESULTS

In CA3 pyramidal neurons, kainic acid induced significant elevations in [Ca²⁺ ]_i and long-lasting neuronal hyperexcitability, both of which were reversed in a dose-dependent manner by CRS. Similarly, CRS suppressed spontaneous rhythmic epileptiform activity in hippocampal slices exposed to zero-Mg²⁺ or 4-aminopyridine. Treatment with CRS also protected murine hippocampal HT-22 cells against excitotoxic injury with glutamate, and this was accompanied by a reduction in [Ca²⁺ ]_i . Neither kainic acid nor CRS alone altered the mitochondrial membrane potential (ΔΨ) in intact, acutely isolated mitochondria. In addition, CRS did not affect mitochondrial respiratory chain activity, Ca²⁺ -induced mitochondrial permeability transition, and Ca²⁺ release from the ER. However, CRS significantly decreased Ca²⁺ flux in human embryonic kidney tsA-201 cells transfected with Ca_v 3.1 (voltage-dependent T-type Ca²⁺ ) channels.

SIGNIFICANCE

Our data indicate that the neuroprotective and antiseizure activity of CRS likely results in part from decreased [Ca²⁺ ]_i accumulation through blockade of T-type Ca²⁺ channels.

Antiepileptic drugs in development pipeline: A recent update

Epilepsy is the most common neurological disorder which significantly affects the quality of life and poses a health as well as economic burden on society. Epilepsy affects approximately 70 million people in the world. The present article reviews the scientific rationale, brief pathophysiology of epilepsy and newer antiepileptic drugs which are presently under clinical development. We have searched the investigational drugs using the key words ‘antiepileptic drugs,’ ‘epilepsy,’ ‘Phase I,’ ‘Phase II’ and ‘Phase III’ in American clinical trial registers (clinicaltrials.gov), the relevant published articles using National Library of Medicine's PubMed database, company websites and supplemented results with a manual search of cross-references and conference abstracts. This review provides a brief description about the antiepileptic drugs which are targeting different mechanisms and the clinical development status of these drugs. Besides the presence of old as well as new AEDs, still there is a need of new drugs or the modified version of old drugs in order to make affected people free of seizures. An optimistic approach should be used to translate the success of preclinical testing to clinical practice. There is an urgent need to improve animal models and to explore new targets with better understanding in order to develop the novel drugs with more efficacy and safety.

•

This review primarily focused on antiepileptic drugs under clinical development.

•

The more realistic approach is needed to discover and develop the novel antiepileptic drugs.

•

Modification of conventional drugs or search of newer targets can lead to development of promising antiepileptic drugs.

•

To develop more efficacious and safe drugs for treatment of epilepsy and refractory seizures

•

There are a number of novel antiepileptic compounds which are under various stages of drug development.

Confusing placebo effect with natural history in epilepsy: A big data approach

For unknown reasons, placebos reduce seizures in clinical trials in many patients. It is also unclear why some drugs showing statistical superiority to placebo in one trial may fail to do so in another. Using Seizuretracker.com, a patient-centered database of 684,825 seizures, we simulated "placebo" and "drug" trials. These simulations were employed to clarify the sources of placebo effects in epilepsy, and to identify methods of diminishing placebo effects. Simulation 1 included 9 trials with a 6-week baseline and 6-week test period, starting at time 0, 3, 6…24 months. Here, "placebo" reduced seizures regardless of study start time. Regression-to-the-mean persisted only for 3 to 6 months. Simulation 2 comprised a 6-week baseline and then 2 years of follow-up. Seizure frequencies continued to improve throughout follow-up. Although the group improved, individuals switched from improvement to worsening and back. Simulation 3 involved a placebo-controlled "drug" trial, to explore methods of placebo response reduction. An efficacious "drug" failed to demonstrate a significant effect compared with "placebo" (p = 0.12), although modifications either in study start time (p = 0.025) or baseline population reduction (p = 0.0028) allowed the drug to achieve a statistically significant effect compared with placebo. In epilepsy clinical trials, some seizure reduction traditionally attributed to placebo effect may reflect the natural course of the disease itself. Understanding these dynamics will allow future investigations into optimal clinical trial design and may lead to identification of more effective therapies. Ann Neurol 2015;78:329-336.

Placebo and nocebo responses in drug trials of epilepsy

Placebo response can be defined as any therapeutic change on placebo, while the nocebo response is any ill effect during placebo exposure. Several meta-analytic approaches have investigated the extent of placebo response in randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trials of focal epilepsies. Placebo response rates (proportion of patients with ≥50% improvement of seizures versus baseline) ranging from 9.9% up to 15.2% have been reported. Interestingly, a sham response of 15.8% has been noted in trials of transcranial magnetic stimulation. Recently, nocebo response rates of 60.3% and 3.9% were noted, which were defined as the proportion of patients with adverse events (AEs) and those withdrawing because of intolerable AEs, respectively. Factors which were found to influence placebo response were as follows: the year of publication (with more recent studies showing higher rates of placebo response), some clinical characteristics of recruited patients (lower placebo response rates with a history of 7 or more prior lifetime AEDs, a high baseline seizure frequency, prior epilepsy surgery, and higher age at diagnosis), trial design and statistical analysis, and whether studies have been conducted in children or adults. Furthermore, placebo and nocebo rates were correlated with respective seizure outcome and adverse events of the experimental AED. Several mechanisms of placebo and nocebo responses are discussed. Specifically, the role of positive or negative expectations of patients and of investigators may influence the placebo and the nocebo response. Finally, recommendations are given on how to address placebo and nocebo responses in clinical practice.

Prevention of generalized tonic-clonic seizures in refractory focal epilepsy: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Secondary generalized tonic-clonic seizures (SGTCS) are among the most severe forms of seizures, and the main risk factor for sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP). Whether some antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) might be more efficacious than others on SGTCS in patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy thus represents an important clinical issue for which no data are currently available.

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of adjunctive AED in which information on efficacy outcomes (i.e., responder rate and/or frequency per 28 days relative to baseline) were available both for all seizure types and for SGTCS. The primary analysis evaluated the efficacy of AEDs on all types of seizure and on SGTCS by comparing the responder rates for AED and for placebo.

RESULTS

Responder rate was available both for all seizure types and for SGTCS in 13 of the 72 eligible trials, evaluating 7 AEDs. Only three AEDs--lacosamide, perampanel and topiramate--showed greater efficacy than placebo. However, confidence intervals of relative risks overlapped for all AEDs but pregabalin, which demonstrated significantly lower efficacy than lacosamide, perampanel, and topiramate. Moreover, there was a nonsignificant trend toward a lower relative risk of responder rate for SGTCS than for all seizure types, which appeared related to a greater response to placebo for this outcome.

SIGNIFICANCE

Indirect comparison of AEDs using randomized placebo-controlled add-on trials does not support robust differences between AEDs to prevent SGTCS. Alternative designs for evaluation of therapeutic interventions in patients at risk for SGTCS-related complications are required.

Pharmacotherapy for tonic-clonic seizures

INTRODUCTION

Occurrence of generalized tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS) is one of the most important risk factors of seizure-related complications and comorbidities in patients with epilepsy. Their prevention is therefore an important aspect of therapeutic management both in idiopathic generalized epilepsies and in focal epilepsies.

AREAS COVERED

It has been shown that the efficacy of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) varies across epilepsy syndromes, with some AEDs efficacious against focal seizures with secondary GTCS (sGTCS) but aggravating primary GTCS (pGTCS). In patients with pGTCS, evidence-based data support the preferential use of valproic acid, lamotrigine, levetiracetam and topiramate. In patients with sGTCS, all AEDs approved in the treatment of focal epilepsies might be used.

EXPERT OPINION

Both in pGTCS and sGTCS, additional data are required, specifically to inform about the relative efficacy of AEDs in relation to each other. Although valproic acid might be the most efficacious drug in idiopathic generalized epilepsies, it should be avoided in women of childbearing age due to its safety profile. In patients with sGTCS, AEDs for which the impact on this seizure type has been formally evaluated and which have demonstrated greater efficacy than placebo might preferentially be used, such as lacosamide, perampanel and topiramate.

Network meta-analyses of antiepileptic drug efficacy and tolerability in drug-resistant focal epilepsies: a clinical perspective

PURPOSE

Network meta-analysis (NMA) is a new technique that allows multiple treatment comparisons and provides estimates of effect sizes for all possible pair-wise comparisons. Several NMAs of antiepileptic drug (AED) efficacy and tolerability in individuals with refractory focal epilepsy, however, came to non-specific and, in some cases, divergent conclusions. We review some clinical factors that may be responsible for these inconsistent findings.

RESULTS

A major issue is the small number of individuals included in the meta-analyses with consequent wide confidence intervals and lack of ability to achieve significant results. Further issues are lack of robustness of the measured efficacy outcome-the responder ratio (the percentage of individuals with a >50 % improvement in seizure frequency); the selection of randomized studies (RCTs) included, i.e., the inclusion of studies with heterogeneous populations (children and adults); and inclusion of people treated with different doses of the experimental drug. Some methods of analysing data from RCTs, such as the last observation carried forward (LOCF) analysis, the choice of different phases of the study to compare to baseline, and the year in which the trial was conducted, selectively affect measurement of efficacy outcomes. Titration speed and other methodological aspects selectively affect tolerability.

CONCLUSION

Several factors restrict the analysis of clinically useful estimates of the comparative efficacy of AEDs, while analysis of tolerability may be easier to accomplish.

The enigma of placebo effects in drug-refractory epilepsies

Placebo effects in the therapy of epilepsy were already known before the introduction of effective antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). They have physiologic correlates, and are even stronger in other neurologic disorders such as pain. Placebo effects in epilepsy have many facets. Our understanding of this phenomenon has increased in the last two decades: placebo effects are stronger in children than in adults, and may be culture- and setting-dependent; and impressive placebo effects occur in animals with epilepsy as well. More research is needed to fully elucidate the mechanism of placebo effects in epilepsy care, particularly as we go forth with studies addressing the issue of pharmacoresistance.

Efficacy and safety of carisbamate in patients with diabetic neuropathy or postherpetic neuralgia: results from 3 randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trials

The results of 3 proof-of-concept studies to evaluate carisbamate's efficacy and safety in treating neuropathic pain are presented. In studies 1 (postherpetic neuralgia, n = 91) and 2 (diabetic neuropathy, n = 137), patients received carisbamate 400 mg/day or placebo for 4 weeks and then crossed over to the other treatment for 4 weeks. In study 3 (diabetic neuropathy, higher carisbamate doses), patients (n = 386) were randomized (1:1:1:1) to receive either carisbamate 800 mg/day, 1200 mg/day, pregabalin 300 mg/day or placebo for 15 weeks. Primary efficacy end point was the mean of the last 7 average daily pain scores obtained on days the study drug was taken, for all 3 studies. Least square mean (95% CI) differences between carisbamate and placebo groups on the primary end point were as follows: study 1: -0.512 (-1.32, 0.29) carisbamate 400 mg/day; study 2: -0.307 (-0.94, 0.33) carisbamate 400 mg/day; and study 3: -0.51 (-1.10, 0.08), carisbamate 800 mg/day; -0.55 (-1.13, 0.04), carisbamate 1200 mg/day; and -0.43 (-1.01, 0.15), pregabalin 300 mg/day. Neither carisbamate (all 3 studies) nor pregabalin (study 3) significantly differed from placebo, although multiple secondary end points showed significant improvement in efficacy with carisbamate in studies 1 and 2. Dizziness was the only treatment-emergent adverse event occurring at ≥10% difference in carisbamate groups versus placebo (study 1: 12% vs. 1%; study 3: 14% vs. 4%; study 2: 1% vs. 2%). Carisbamate, although well tolerated, did not demonstrate efficacy in neuropathic pain across these studies, nor did the active comparator pregabalin (study 3).

Clinical features associated with placebo response in refractory focal epilepsy

For clinical trial design and for clinical practice, it is of importance to assess factors associated with placebo response in patients with refractory epilepsy. We determined factors associated with placebo response in 359 adult patients with refractory focal epilepsy participating in three randomized placebo-controlled trials of the new antiepileptic drug lacosamide. At the end of the randomized 12-week maintenance period, 81 (23%) of the 359 patients randomized to placebo achieved at least a 50% seizure reduction (responders) compared to baseline. In contrast, 278 (77%) patients did not achieve a 50% seizure reduction (non-responders) compared to baseline. In multivariate analysis, five factors, which were present prior to the exposure to placebo, were found to be associated with placebo response. Higher age at study entry improved the chances of placebo response for each year [p=0.023, odds ratio (OR) 1.034 (95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.005-1.063)]. In contrast, a lower chance of placebo response was seen with age at diagnosis of epilepsy of 6-20 years compared to ≤5 years [p=0.041, OR 0.475 (95% CI: 0.232-0.971)]. A history of 7 or more prior lifetime AEDs lowered the chance of achieving placebo response compared to 1-3 prior lifetime AEDs [p<0.001, OR 0.224 (95% CI: 0.101-0.493)] as did a baseline seizure frequency >10 seizures per 28 days compared to ≤5 seizures per 28 days [p=0.026, OR 0.431 (95% CI: 0.205-0.904)]. Prior epilepsy surgery lowered the likelihood of placebo response [p=0.02, OR 0.22 (95% CI: 0.062-0.785)]. We suggest that age at exposure to placebo, age at diagnosis of epilepsy, the number of prior lifetime AEDs, baseline seizure frequency and a history of epilepsy surgery appear to be associated with placebo response in adults with refractory focal epilepsy.

Effect of carisbamate on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of warfarin in healthy participants

Carisbamate's effect (200 mg twice-daily [study 1], 600 mg twice-daily [study 2]) on warfarin's (25 mg single dose) pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics (international normalized ratio) was assessed during 2 open-label studies in healthy participants. Coadministration of either carisbamate regimen produced small changes on the mean maximum plasma concentration (C(max)) and mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve to the last measurable time point (AUC(last)) of (S)- and (R)-warfarin, which are unlikely to be clinically significant. For (S)-warfarin, the ratios (with carisbamate/without carisbamate) of geometric means for C(max) were 105.44 (study 1) and 98.48 (study 2) and for AUC(last) were 109.33 (study 1) and 114.43 (study 2); the corresponding 90% confidence intervals were within the bioequivalence limits of 80% to 125%. Results were similar for (R)-warfarin. Carisbamate at 600 mg (but not 200 mg) twice-daily prolonged the elimination half-life of (S)- and (R)-warfarin by ~10 hours (25% and 32% increase, respectively). Prothrombin time was unaltered by either carisbamate dose. Adverse events with the highest incidence were dizziness (50%) and headache (50%) in study 1 and somnolence (56%) in study 2. Warfarin exposure and international normalized ratio were unaffected by coadministration of carisbamate 200 mg or 600 mg twice-daily. Carisbamate was well tolerated.

Risk of sudden unexpected death in epilepsy in patients given adjunctive antiepileptic treatment for refractory seizures: a meta-analysis of placebo-controlled randomised trials

BACKGROUND

Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) represents the main cause of death in patients with refractory epilepsy. No evidence-based intervention to prevent SUDEP exists. We postulated that pooling data from randomised placebo-controlled trials in patients with refractory epilepsy might show a lower incidence of SUDEP in patients receiving antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) at efficacious doses than in those receiving placebo.

METHODS

We searched Medline and the Cochrane Library for randomised trials investigating any AED in the add-on treatment of drug-resistant epilepsy in adults. We extracted the number and causes of death in patients allocated to AEDs at doses that were more efficacious than placebo against seizures, AEDs at non-efficacious doses, and placebo. In our primary analysis, we compared the occurrence of definite or probable SUDEP between patients given efficacious AED doses and those given placebo using the Mantel-Haenszel method, with exclusion of trials with no event.

FINDINGS

Data of 33 deaths, including 20 deemed as SUDEP, were extracted from 112 eligible randomised trials. 18 deaths were classified as definite or probable SUDEP and two as possible SUDEP. Definite or probable SUDEP, all SUDEP, and all causes of death were significantly less frequent in the efficacious AED group than in the placebo group, with odds ratios of 0·17 (95% CI 0·05-0·57, p=0·0046), 0·17 (0·05-0·57, p=0·0046), and 0·37 (0·17-0·81, p=0·0131), respectively. Rates of definite or probable SUDEP per 1000 person-years were 0·9 (95% CI 0·2-2·7) in patients who received efficacious AED doses and 6·9 (3·8-11·6) in those allocated to placebo.

INTERPRETATION

Treatment with adjunctive AEDs at efficacious doses may have reduced the incidence of definite or probable SUDEP by more than seven times compared with placebo in patients with previously uncontrolled seizures. This result provides evidence in favour of active treatment revision for patients with refractory epilepsy.

FUNDING

None.