Treatment with Diazepam in Acute Stroke Prevents Poststroke Seizures: A Substudy of the EGASIS Trial

An update on the novel methods for the discovery of antiseizure and antiepileptogenic medications: where are we in 2024?

INTRODUCTION

Despite the availability of around 30 antiseizure medications, 1/3 of patients with epilepsy fail to become seizure-free upon pharmacological treatment. Available medications provide adequate symptomatic control in two-thirds of patients, but disease-modifying drugs are still scarce. Recently, though, new paradigms have been explored.

AREAS COVERED

Three areas are reviewed in which a high degree of innovation in the search for novel antiseizure and antiepileptogenic medications has been implemented: development of novel screening approaches, search for novel therapeutic targets, and adoption of new drug discovery paradigms aligned with a systems pharmacology perspective.

EXPERT OPINION

In the past, worldwide leaders in epilepsy have reiteratively stated that the lack of progress in the field may be explained by the recurrent use of the same molecular targets and screening procedures to identify novel medications. This landscape has changed recently, as reflected by the new Epilepsy Therapy Screening Program and the introduction of many in vitro and in vivo models that could possibly improve our chances of identifying first-in-class medications that may control drug-resistant epilepsy or modify the course of disease. Other milestones include the study of new molecular targets for disease-modifying drugs and exploration of a systems pharmacology perspective to design new drugs.

The added value of risk assessment and subsequent targeted treatment for epileptic seizures after stroke: An early-HTA analysis

INTRODUCTION

The development of post-stroke epilepsy (PSE) is related to a worse clinical outcome in stroke patients. Adding a biomarker to the clinical diagnostic process for the prediction of PSE may help to establish targeted and personalized treatment for high-risk patients, which could lead to improved patient outcomes. We assessed the added value of a risk assessment and subsequent targeted treatment by conducting an early Health Technology Assessment.

METHODS

Interviews were conducted with four relevant stakeholders in the field of PSE to obtain a realistic view of the current healthcare and their opinions on the potential value of a PSE risk assessment and subsequent targeted treatment. The consequences on quality of life and costs of current care of a hypothetical care pathway with perfect risk assessment were modeled based on information from a literature review and the input from the stakeholders. Subsequently, the maximum added value (the headroom) was calculated. Sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of this result to variation in assumed input parameters, i.e. the accuracy of the risk assessment, the efficacy of anti-seizure medication (ASM), and the probability of patients expected to develop PSE.

RESULTS

All stakeholders considered the addition of a predictive biomarker for the risk assessment of PSE to be of value. The headroom amounted to €12,983. The sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the headroom remained beneficial when varying the accuracy of the risk assessment, the ASM efficacy, and the number of patients expected to develop PSE.

DISCUSSION

We showed that a risk assessment for PSE development is potentially valuable. This work demonstrates that it is worthwhile to undertake clinical studies to evaluate biomarkers for the prediction of patients at high risk for PSE and to assess the value of targeted prophylactic treatment.

Post-stroke Everything

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims at providing updates on selected post-stroke complications. We examined recent advances in diagnosing and treating the following post-stroke complications: cognitive impairment, epilepsy, depression, fatigue, tremors, dysphagia, and pain.

RECENT FINDINGS

Advances in understanding the mechanisms of post-stroke complications, in general, are needed despite advances made in understanding, treating, and preventing these complications. There are growing progresses in integrating new tools to diagnose post-stroke cognitive impairment. The potential role of acute stroke reperfusion treatment in post-stroke epilepsy and its impact on other stroke complications is getting more transparent. Post-stroke depression remains underestimated and new tools to diagnose depression after stroke are being developed. New promising pharmacological approaches to treating post-stroke pain are emerging. Tremors related to stroke are poorly understood and under-evaluated, while treatment towards post-stroke dysphagia has benefited from new non-pharmacological to pharmacological approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

An integrative approach to stroke complications and collaborations between providers across specialties are more likely to improve stroke outcomes.

Antiepileptogenesis after stroke-trials and tribulations: Methodological challenges and recruitment results of a Phase II study with eslicarbazepine acetate

There is currently no evidence to support the use of antiseizure medications to prevent unprovoked seizures following stroke. Experimental animal models suggested a potential antiepileptogenic effect for eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL), and a Phase II, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was designed to test this hypothesis and assess whether ESL treatment for 1 month can prevent unprovoked seizures following stroke. We outline the design and status of this antiepileptogenesis study, and discuss the challenges encountered in its execution to date. Patients at high risk of developing unprovoked seizures after acute intracerebral hemorrhage or acute ischemic stroke were randomized to receive ESL 800 mg/d or placebo, initiated within 120 hours after primary stroke occurrence. Treatment continued until Day 30, then tapered off. Patients could receive all necessary therapies for stroke treatment according to clinical practice guidelines and standard of care, and are being followed up for 18 months. The primary efficacy endpoint is the occurrence of a first unprovoked seizure within 6 months after randomization ("failure rate"). Secondary efficacy assessments include the occurrence of a first unprovoked seizure during 12 months after randomization and during the entire study; functional outcomes (Barthel Index original 10-item version; National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale); post-stroke depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9; PHQ-9); and overall survival. Safety assessments include the evaluation of treatment-emergent adverse events; laboratory parameters; vital signs; electrocardiogram; suicidal ideation and behavior (PHQ-9 question 9). The protocol aimed to randomize approximately 200 patients (1:1), recruited from 21 sites in seven European countries and Israel. Despite the challenges encountered, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, the study progressed and included a remarkable number of patients, with 129 screened and 125 randomized. Recruitment was stopped after 30 months, the first patient entered in May 2019, and the study is ongoing and following up on patients according to the Clinical Trial Protocol.

Antiepileptic drugs for the primary and secondary prevention of seizures after stroke

BACKGROUND

Seizures after stroke are an important clinical problem and may result in poor outcomes. The indications of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) for seizure prophylaxis after stroke remain unclear. This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review previously published in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of AEDs for the primary and secondary prevention of seizures after stroke. For primary prevention, we aimed to assess whether AEDs reduce the likelihood of seizures in people who have a stroke but do not have a seizure. For secondary prevention, we aimed to assess whether AEDs reduce the likelihood of further seizures in people who have a stroke and at least one post-stroke seizure.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases on 9 March 2021: Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to March 08, 2021). CRS Web includes randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialised Registers of Cochrane Review Groups including Epilepsy and Stroke. We also checked the reference lists of articles retrieved from these searches.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised and quasi-randomised controlled studies that recruited participants with a clinical diagnosis of stroke, either ischaemic or haemorrhagic. We excluded studies that only recruited participants with subarachnoid haemorrhage, subdural haemorrhage, extradural haemorrhage, or other non-stroke diagnoses such as tumour- or infection-related infarction or haemorrhage. We also excluded studies that recruited only participants who had undergone neurosurgery. We included participants of all ages suffering any seizure type who were assigned to AEDs or placebo groups.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

In accordance with standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration, two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion before evaluating trial risk of bias and extracting relevant data. The primary outcome assessed was the proportion of participants who experienced seizures in the follow-up period. We presented results as summary risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs for continuous outcomes. Where we had sufficient data, we calculated random-effects (Mantel-Haenszel) meta-analyses for dichotomous outcomes; otherwise, we reported results narratively. We used the I2 statistic to analyse statistical heterogeneity. We planned to use funnel plots to assess publication bias in meta-analyses with at least 10 included studies. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Two studies with a total of 856 subjects were included. AEDs were not shown to be effective in primary prophylaxis of post-stroke seizure (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.26; 2 studies, 856 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The first study was a randomised double-blind study comparing valproic acid with placebo for primary seizure prevention up to one year after stroke. The study included 72 adults with intracerebral haemorrhage. There was no difference in the risk of post-stroke seizures (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.16) or of death (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.40 to 3.58). The second study was a substudy on the use of diazepam in acute stroke. It was a randomised double-blind study, comparing a three-day diazepam treatment versus placebo for primary seizure prevention up to three months after stroke in 784 adults with acute stroke. There was no evidence of a difference in the risk of post-stroke seizures for all stroke or subgroups of haemorrhagic or ischaemic stroke (RR for all stroke 0.47, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.22). In a subgroup analysis of anterior circulation cortical infarcts, primary prophylaxis with diazepam was associated with a reduced risk of post-stroke seizures (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.95). Risks of mortality did not differ between the diazepam and the placebo group at two weeks (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.26) and three months follow-up (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.26). We assessed both studies to be at a low overall risk of bias. Using the GRADE approach, we assessed the overall certainty of the evidence as low to moderate.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to support the routine use of AEDs on the primary and secondary prevention of seizures after stroke. Further well-conducted studies are warranted for this important clinical problem.

Impact of drug treatment and drug interactions in post-stroke epilepsy

Stroke is a huge burden on our society and this is expected to grow in the future due to the aging population and the associated co-morbidities. The improvement of acute stroke care has increased the survival rate of stroke patients, and many patients are left with permanent disability, which makes stroke the main cause of adult disability. Unfortunately, many patients face other severe complications such as post-stroke seizures and epilepsy. Acute seizures (ASS) occur within 1 week after the stroke while later occurring unprovoked seizures are diagnosed as post-stroke epilepsy (PSE). Both are associated with a poor prognosis of a functional recovery. The underlying neurobiological mechanisms are complex and poorly understood. There are no universal guidelines on the management of PSE. There is increasing evidence for several risk factors for ASS/PSE, however, the impacts of recanalization, drugs used for secondary prevention of stroke, treatment of stroke co-morbidities and antiseizure medication are currently poorly understood. This review focuses on the common medications that stroke patients are prescribed and potential drug interactions possibly complicating the management of ASS/PSE.