The SANAD II study of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam, zonisamide, or lamotrigine for newly diagnosed focal epilepsy: an open-label, non-inferiority, multicentre, phase 4, randomised controlled trial

Screening indicators to evaluate the clinical significance of drug-drug interactions in polypharmacy among older adults with psychiatric disorders: a delphi study

BACKGROUND

Polypharmacy is common in older adults with psychiatric disorders, but no consensus has reached about the reliable indicators evaluating the benefits and risks of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) in polypharmacy. We aimed to identify indicators suitable for evaluating the clinical significance of DDIs in polypharmacy in older adults with psychiatric disorders.

METHODS

The online tools were used to distribute and collect the questionnaires. The Delphi method was applied to analyze experts' opinions. The degree of authority and coordination of experts were analyzed using the coefficient of variation, coefficient of coordination, expert's judgment factor, familiarity with the study content factor, and Kendall coordination coefficient. Statistical analysis was conducted using the IBM SPSS® Statistics Package version 26.0.

RESULTS

After three rounds of expert consultation, five primary and eleven secondary indicators were identified. The primary "pharmacodynamic indicator" included "severity of adverse drug reactions", "duration of adverse drug reaction", "symptom relief", "time to onset of symptomatic relief", "number of days in hospital", and "duration of medication". The secondary "pharmacokinetic indicator" contained "dosage administered" and "dosing intervals". The primary "patient tolerance indicator" contained one secondary indicator of "patient tolerability". The primary indicator "patient adherence" contained one secondary indicator of "patient adherence to medication". The primary indicator "cost of drug combination" contained one secondary indicator of "readmission". These indicators were used to determine the clinical significance of DDIs during polypharmacy.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical significance of drug combinations should be taken into account when polypharmacy is used in the elderly. The five primary indicators and eleven secondary indicators might be preferred to evaluate their risks and benefits. Medication management in this population requires a multidisciplinary team, in which nurses play a key role. Future research should focus on how to establish efficient multidisciplinary team workflows and use functional factors to assess DDIs in polypharmacy for psychiatric disorders.

Second antiseizure medication monotherapy in patients with adult-onset epilepsy: A register-based analysis

OBJECTIVE

Revision of therapy is fundamental in epilepsy care, since only half of patients achieve seizure freedom and tolerate the first antiseizure medication (ASM). We studied the selection and retention of second antiseizure medication monotherapy in adults who discontinued treatment with one of the three most frequently prescribed first ASMs, and the impact of age or brain comorbidities.

METHODS

Using Swedish national registers, we conducted a population-based, retrospective cohort study from 2007 to 2019 on patients age ≥ 30 at the epilepsy diagnosis that had switched to a second monotherapy after the three most common initial monotherapies (n = 7369). Retention rates (RR) were estimated via Kaplan-Meier. Discontinuation of the second monotherapy was defined as 12-month prescription gap or initiation of a third ASM. Analyses were stratified by sex, age, and presence of stroke or dementia.

RESULTS

The three most commonly prescribed second ASMs were carbamazepine, levetiracetam, and lamotrigine. The 1-year retention rate was 63-76% in all patients. For groups with stroke or dementia, the maximal 1-year RRs were 77% and 87%, respectively. After five years, retention rates ranged from 12% to 39%. There were no major differences between ASMs, apart from in patients discontinuing carbamazepine, where lamotrigine had a superior retention compared to levetiracetam as second monotherapy.

SIGNIFICANCE

The three most often prescribed second ASMs seem to be suitable treatment options according to present guidelines. The second ASMs' retention rates were initially high in all studied patient groups but dropped to approximately the expected proportion of second monotherapy responders over the next five years. This suggests that therapy revision could be expedited.

Approach to Patients with Seizures and Epilepsy: A Guide for Primary Care Physicians

Seizures and epilepsy are common neurologic conditions that are frequently encountered in the outpatient primary care setting. An accurate diagnosis relies on a thorough clinical history and evaluation. Understanding seizure semiology and classification is crucial in conducting the initial assessment. Knowledge of common seizure triggers and provoking factors can further guide diagnostic testing and initial management. The pharmacodynamic characteristics and side effect profiles of anti-seizure medications are important considerations when deciding treatment and counseling patients, particularly those with comorbidities and in special populations such as patient of childbearing potential.

Clinical approaches for poststroke seizure: a review

Poststroke seizure is a potential complication of stroke, which is the most frequent acute symptomatic seizure in adults. Patients with stroke may present with an abnormal or aggressive behavior accompanied by altered mental status and symptoms, such as hemiparesis, dysarthria, and sensory deficits. Although stroke manifestations that mimic seizures are rare, diagnosing poststroke seizures can be challenging when accompanied with negative postictal symptoms. Differential diagnoses of poststroke seizures include movement disorders, syncope, and functional (nonepileptic) seizures, which may present with symptoms similar to seizures. Furthermore, it is important to determine whether poststroke seizures occur early or late. Seizures occurring within and after 7 d of stroke onset were classified as early and late seizures, respectively. Early seizures have the same clinical course as acute symptomatic seizures; they rarely recur or require long-term antiseizure medication. Conversely, late seizures are associated with a risk of recurrence similar to that of unprovoked seizures in a patient with a focal lesion, thereby requiring long-term administration of antiseizure medication. After diagnosis, concerns regarding treatment strategies, treatment duration, and administration of primary and secondary prophylaxis often arise. Antiseizure medication decisions for the initiation of short-term primary and long-term secondary seizure prophylaxis should be considered for patients with stroke. Antiseizure drugs such as lamotrigine, carbamazepine, lacosamide, levetiracetam, phenytoin, and valproate may be administered. Poststroke seizures should be diagnosed systematically through history with differential diagnosis; in addition, classifying them as early or late seizures can help to determine treatment strategies.

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.

Zonisamide attenuates pressure overload-induced myocardial hypertrophy in mice through proteasome inhibition

Myocardial hypertrophy is a pathological thickening of the myocardium which ultimately results in heart failure. We previously reported that zonisamide, an antiepileptic drug, attenuated pressure overload-caused myocardial hypertrophy and diabetic cardiomyopathy in murine models. In addition, we have found that the inhibition of proteasome activates glycogen synthesis kinase 3 (GSK-3) thus alleviates myocardial hypertrophy, which is an important anti-hypertrophic strategy. In this study, we investigated whether zonisamide prevented pressure overload-caused myocardial hypertrophy through suppressing proteasome. Pressure overload-caused myocardial hypertrophy was induced in mice by trans-aortic constriction (TAC) surgery. Two days after the surgery, the mice were administered zonisamide (10, 20, 40 mg·kg-1·d-1, i.g.) for four weeks. We showed that zonisamide administration significantly mitigated impaired cardiac function. Furthermore, zonisamide administration significantly inhibited proteasome activity as well as the expression levels of proteasome subunit beta types (PSMB) of the 20 S proteasome (PSMB1, PSMB2 and PSMB5) and proteasome-regulated particles (RPT) of the 19 S proteasome (RPT1, RPT4) in heart tissues of TAC mice. In primary neonatal rat cardiomyocytes (NRCMs), zonisamide (0.3 μM) prevented myocardial hypertrophy triggered by angiotensin II (Ang II), and significantly inhibited proteasome activity, proteasome subunits and proteasome-regulated particles. In Ang II-treated NRCMs, we found that 18α-glycyrrhetinic acid (18α-GA, 2 mg/ml), a proteasome inducer, eliminated the protective effects of zonisamide against myocardial hypertrophy and proteasome. Moreover, zonisamide treatment activated GSK-3 through inhibiting the phosphorylated AKT (protein kinase B, PKB) and phosphorylated liver kinase B1/AMP-activated protein kinase (LKB1/AMPKα), the upstream of GSK-3. Zonisamide treatment also inhibited GSK-3's downstream signaling proteins, including extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) and GATA binding protein 4 (GATA4), both being the hypertrophic factors. Collectively, this study highlights the potential of zonisamide as a new therapeutic agent for myocardial hypertrophy, as it shows potent anti-hypertrophic potential through the suppression of proteasome.

Prevalence of and factors associated with the early prescription of antiseizure medications in adults newly diagnosed with epilepsy in Germany

BACKGROUND

There is little information on prescription patterns of antiseizure medications (ASMs) during the early management of patients with epilepsy in Germany. Therefore, this study investigated the prevalence of and the factors associated with ASM prescription in patients newly diagnosed with epilepsy in this country.

METHODS

Adults diagnosed for the first time with epilepsy in one of 128 neurology practices in Germany between 2005 and 2021 were included (Disease Analyzer database, IQVIA). The prescription of ASMs was assessed within 30 days, six months, and 12 months of the diagnosis. Covariates were demographic factors, epilepsy sub-diagnoses, and co-diagnoses frequently associated with epilepsy.

RESULTS

This study included 55,962 participants (mean [SD] age 52.5 [20.0] years; 50.5 % men). The prevalence of ASM prescription ranged from 45.0 % within 30 days to 66.0 % within 12 months of the diagnosis. Men were less likely to receive ASMs within six and 12 months of epilepsy diagnosis than women. In addition, epilepsy sub-diagnoses of symptomatic, complex, or generalized nature were associated with increased odds of ASM prescription compared with epilepsy of unspecified nature. Finally, there was an inverse and significant association between multiple co-diagnoses (e.g., diabetes, mental and behavioral disorders due to use of alcohol, and traumatic brain injury) and ASM prescribing.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial proportion of participants were prescribed ASMs in the year following epilepsy diagnosis, highlighting that the early prescription of ASMs was necessary for these patients. Further research is warranted to corroborate the present findings in other countries and settings.

Established and emerging GABAA receptor pharmacotherapy for epilepsy

Drugs that modulate the GABAA receptor are widely used in clinical practice for both the long-term management of epilepsy and emergency seizure control. In addition to older medications that have well-defined roles for the treatment of epilepsy, recent discoveries into the structure and function of the GABAA receptor have led to the development of newer compounds designed to maximise therapeutic benefit whilst minimising adverse effects, and whose position within the epilepsy pharmacologic armamentarium is still emerging. Drugs that modulate the GABAA receptor will remain a cornerstone of epilepsy management for the foreseeable future and, in this article, we provide an overview of the mechanisms and clinical efficacy of both established and emerging pharmacotherapies.

Risk assessment of arrhythmias related to three antiseizure medications: a systematic review and single-arm meta-analysis

Objective

Antiseizure medications (ASMs) are first line therapy for seizure disorders. Their effects on arrhythmias, especially the risk of arrhythmias associated with lacosamide (LCM), levetiracetam (LEV), and perampanel (PER), have been intensely investigated.

Methods

We searched four databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science) until August 6, 2023. We used a common effects model and reported data as pooled incidence with 95% CIs. Meta-analyses were conducted to elucidate the risk of arrhythmias with different drugs, and Egger's regression was performed to detect publication bias analysis.

Results

We included 11 clinical trials with 1,031 participants. The pooled incidence of arrhythmias in the LEV group was 0.005 (95% CI: 0.001-0.013), while it was 0.014 in the LCM group (95% CI: 0.003-0.030). Publication bias analyses indicated no significant bias in the LEV group (t = 0.02, df = 4, p-value = 0.9852) but a significant bias in the LCM group (t = 5.94, df = 3, p-value = 0.0095). We corrected for this bias in the LCM group using the trim-and-fill method, which yielded a similar pooled incidence of 0.0137 (95% CI: 0.0036-0.0280), indicating good reliability. Due to insufficient studies, we could not conduct a meta-analysis for PER, and we analyzed them in our systematic review.

Conclusion

The use of LCM significantly elevated the risk of arrhythmias, while LEV had non-significant arrhythmogenic effects. As for the arrhythmogenic effects of PER, more clinical trials are needed in the future.

Zonisamide: A Comprehensive, Updated Review for the Clinician

Purpose of Review

Zonisamide (ZNS) was first approved in the United States in 2000 for the adjunctive treatment of patients aged 16 years or older with partial (focal) seizures. Although ZNS has been proven to treat multiple seizure types, it has been largely underutilized in US clinical practice.

Recent Findings

Published literature demonstrated that antiseizure medications (ASMs) acting on Na+ and Ca2+ channels may add beneficial effects in many seizure types by reducing seizure frequency and leading to overall improvements. In addition, effects of ZNS may lead to clinical improvements in Parkinson disease, alcohol and sleep disorders, pain, and migraine. ZNS is available in multiple formulations and is a safe and effective, broad spectrum ASM.

Summary

The purpose of this review was to provide an update to what is known about the efficacy of ZNS and where it shows benefits in the treatment of patients with epilepsy and other CNS disorders through its many unique mechanisms of action.

Clinical outcome assessment in patients with epilepsy: The value of health-related quality of life measurements

This narrative review provides an overview of the current knowledge on health-related quality of life (HRQOL), a relevant clinical outcome in patients with epilepsy. It shows that the most important factor determining HRQOL in this patient group is seizure frequency. In particular, seizure-freedom is associated with better HRQOL scores. Many other factors may impact perceived HRQOL aspects, but their interrelation is complex and requires further research. Novel analytical approaches, such as hierarchical cluster and symptom network analyses might shed further light on this, and may result in recommendations for interventions on the most 'central' factors influencing different aspects of HRQOL in patients with epilepsy. Next, an overview of the HRQOL tools and analytical methods currently used in epilepsy care, with a focus on clinical trials, is provided. The QOLIE-31 is the most frequently applied and best validated tool. Several other questionnaires focusing on specific aspects of HRQOL (e.g., mood, social impact) are less frequently used. We show some pitfalls that should be taken into account when designing study protocols including HRQOL endpoints. This includes standardized statistical analysis approaches and predefined reporting methods for HRQOL in epilepsy populations. It has been shown in other patient groups that the lack of such standardisation negatively impacts the quality and comparability of results. We conclude with a number of recommendations for future research.

Cognitive and psychiatric adverse events during adjunctive cenobamate treatment in phase 2 and phase 3 clinical studies

OBJECTIVE

Cognitive and psychiatric adverse events in patients with epilepsy are important determinants of therapeutic outcomes and patient quality of life. We assessed the relationship between adjunctive cenobamate treatment and selected cognitive and psychiatric treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in adults with uncontrolled focal epilepsy.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of pooled populations of patients with focal epilepsy from two phase 2, randomized, double-blind clinical trials; two open-label extensions (OLEs) of those trials; and a long-term, open-label, phase 3 safety study. Occurrence of cognitive and psychiatric TEAEs in patients treated with adjunctive cenobamate or placebo during double-blind treatment were evaluated. Exposure-adjusted incidence rates of the cognitive and psychiatric TEAEs, defined as the number of TEAEs per patient-year of treatment, during up to 7 years of long-term adjunctive cenobamate treatment, were determined in the pooled OLE and phase 3 patient populations.

RESULTS

The pooled randomized trials resulted in a population of 442 patients treated with cenobamate (100 mg/day: n = 108; 200 mg/day: n = 223; 400 mg/day: n = 111) and 216 placebo-treated patients. The combined open-label studies resulted in pooled populations of cenobamate-treated patients ranging from n = 1690 during Year 1 to n = 103 during Year 7. Among cenobamate-treated (all doses) and placebo-treated patients during double-blind treatment, cognitive TEAEs were reported by ≤ 1.9 % (range, 0 %-1.9 %) and ≤ 0.5 % (range, 0 %-0.5 %), respectively, and psychiatric TEAEs by ≤ 3.6 % (range, 0 %-3.6 %) and ≤ 3.2 % (range, 0 %-3.2 %), respectively. During up to 7 years of open-label adjunctive cenobamate treatment, exposure-adjusted incidence rates of cognitive and psychiatric TEAEs were < 0.018 and < 0.038 events per patient-year, respectively. Discontinuation of adjunctive cenobamate due to cognitive or psychiatric TEAEs assessed in this study during double-blind or open-label treatment occurred in ≤ 0.3 % and ≤ 1.7 % of patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Cognitive and psychiatric TEAEs were reported by similar numbers of cenobamate- and placebo-treated patients during double-blind adjunctive cenobamate treatment (< 4 % of patients), and exposure-adjusted incidence rates of these TEAEs remained low during open-label cenobamate treatment for up to 7 years. Treatment discontinuations due to these TEAEs were rare. The results of this post-hoc analysis indicate that adjunctive cenobamate treatment exhibits a low incidence of cognitive or psychiatric TEAEs in patients with uncontrolled focal seizures.

Epilepsy in cardiofaciocutaneous syndrome: Clinical burden and response to anti-seizure medication

Treatment-resistant epilepsy is among the most serious complications of cardiofaciocutaneous syndrome (CFCS), a rare disorder caused by germline variants in the RAS-MAPK signaling pathway. This study analyzed the clinical characteristics of epilepsy and response to anti-seizure medications (ASMs) in a multinational CFCS cohort. A caregiver survey provided data regarding seizure history, use of ASMs and other treatment approaches, adverse effects, caregiver perception of treatment response, and neurological disease burden impact among individuals with CFCS. Results from 138 survey responses were quantitatively analyzed in conjunction with molecular genetic results and neurological records. The disease burden impact of CFCS was higher among individuals with epilepsy (n = 74/138), especially those with more severe seizure presentation. Oxcarbazepine, a sodium-channel blocker, had the best seizure control profile with relatively infrequent adverse effects. The most commonly prescribed ASM, levetiracetam, demonstrated comparatively poor seizure control. ASM efficacy was generally similar for individuals with BRAF and MAP2K1 gene variants. The high proportion of patients with CFCS who experienced poor seizure control despite use of multiple ASMs highlights a substantial unmet treatment need. Prospective study of ASM efficacy and clinical trials of therapies to attenuate RAS-MAPK signaling may improve avenues for clinical management.

Safety and efficacy of levetiracetam and carbamazepine monotherapy in the management of pediatric focal epilepsy: a randomized clinical trial

Due to the limited number of studies in children with focal epilepsy and the importance of choosing the most suitable drug to control seizures in children, the administration of the most effective medication with the most negligible adverse events is vital. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and adverse events of carbamazepine vs. levetiracetam monotherapy in children with focal seizures. A monocentric, randomized, controlled, double-blind, parallel-group clinical trial was designed. This study was approved by the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (registration number: IRCT20170216032603N2) on June 19, 2020, and conducted at the neurology department of Imam Ali Hospital, Karaj, Iran, from February 2020 to March 2021. This study assessed 120 patients with recently diagnosed focal seizures aged 2 to 14. Patients were randomly divided into two groups, who received carbamazepine (CBZ) 15 to 20 mg/kg and levetiracetam (LEV) 20 to 40 mg/kg daily, respectively. Patients were evaluated for improvement and complications at weeks 4, 12, and 24. Out of 120 patients included in the study, six patients were excluded due to various complications of CBZ. The mean number of seizures at the end of the fourth, twelfth, and twenty-fourth weeks were 1.09 ± 0.75, 0.62 ± 0.27, and 0.39 ± 0.12 in the carbamazepine group and 1.11 ± 0.63, 0.52 ± 0.21, and 0.37 ± 0.11 in the LEV group, respectively (P > 0.05). Similarly, the number of seizure-free patients was 34, 44, and 48 in the CBZ group compared to 41, 50, and 54 in the LEV group, respectively (P > 0.05). On the other hand, the frequency of somnolence, dermatologic complications, and agitation was considerably higher in the CBZ group (P < 0.05). Although both medicines were equally effective in seizure control, CBZ was associated with considerably more adverse events and less patient compliance. Physicians should be aware of this difference to prevent unwanted consequences.

Lamotrigine add-on therapy for drug-resistant focal epilepsy

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of a Cochrane Review last updated in 2020. Epilepsy is a common neurological disorder, affecting 0.5% to 1% of the population. In nearly 30% of cases, epilepsy is resistant to currently available drugs. Pharmacological treatment remains the first choice to control epilepsy. Lamotrigine is a second-generation antiseizure medication. When used as an add-on (in combination with other antiseizure medications), lamotrigine can reduce seizures, but with some adverse effects.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of add-on lamotrigine, compared with add-on placebo or no add-on treatment in people with drug-resistant focal epilepsy.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE (Ovid) on 3 October 2022 with no language restrictions. CRS Web includes randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialised Registers of Cochrane Review Groups, including Epilepsy.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated add-on lamotrigine versus add-on placebo or no add-on treatment in people of any age with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. We used data from the first period of eligible cross-over trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For this update, two review authors independently selected trials and extracted data. Our primary outcome was 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency. Our secondary outcomes were treatment withdrawal, adverse effects, cognitive effects, and quality of life. Primary analyses were by intention-to-treat. We performed sensitivity best- and worse-case analyses to account for missing outcome data. We calculated pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% Cls) for dichotomous outcomes.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no new studies for this update, so the results and conclusions of the review are unchanged. We included five parallel-group studies in adults or children, eight cross-over studies in adults or children, and one parallel study with a responder-enriched design in infants. In total, these 14 studies enroled 1806 eligible participants (38 infants, 199 children, 1569 adults). Baseline phases ranged from four to 12 weeks and treatment phases ranged from eight to 36 weeks. We rated 11 studies (1243 participants) at low overall risk of bias and three (697 participants) at unclear overall risk of bias due to lack of information on study design. Four studies (563 participants) reported effective blinding. Lamotrigine compared with placebo probably increases the likelihood of achieving 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.45 to 2.23; 12 trials, 1322 participants (adults and children); moderate-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in risk of treatment withdrawal for any reason among people treated with lamotrigine versus people treated with placebo (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.37; 14 trials; 1806 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Lamotrigine compared with placebo is probably associated with a greater risk of ataxia (RR 3.34, 99% Cl 2.01 to 5.55; 12 trials; 1525 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), dizziness (RR 1.76, 99% Cl 1.28 to 2.43; 13 trials; 1768 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), nausea (RR 1.81, 99% CI 1.22 to 2.68; 12 studies, 1486 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and diplopia (RR 3.79, 99% Cl 2.15 to 6.68; 3 trials, 944 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in the risk of fatigue between lamotrigine and placebo (RR 0.82, 99% CI 0.55 to 1.22; 12 studies, 1552 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Lamotrigine as an add-on treatment for drug-resistant focal seizures is probably effective for reducing seizure frequency. Certain adverse effects (ataxia, dizziness, diplopia, and nausea) are probably more likely to occur with lamotrigine compared with placebo. There is probably little or no difference in the number of people who withdraw from treatment with lamotrigine versus placebo. The trials were of relatively short duration and provided no long-term evidence. In addition, some trials had few participants. Further trials are needed to assess the long-term effects of lamotrigine and to compare lamotrigine with other add-on drugs.

Cenobamate in refractory epilepsy: Overview of treatment options and practical considerations

Management of drug resistant epilepsy (DRE) represents a challenge to the treating clinician. This manuscript addresses DRE and provides an overview of treatment options, medical, surgical, and dietary. It addresses treatment strategies in polytherapy, then focuses on the role cenobamate (CNB) may play in reducing the burden of DRE while providing practical advice for its introduction. CNB is a recently approved, third generation, anti-seizure medication (ASM), a tetrazole-derived carbamate, thought to have a dual mechanism of action, through its effect on sodium channels as well as on GABAA receptors at a non-benzodiazepine site. CNB, having a long half-life, is an effective add-on ASM in refractory focal epilepsy with a higher response rate and a higher seizure-freedom rate than is usually seen in regulatory clinical trials. Experience post-licensing, though still limited, supports the findings of clinical trials and is encouraging. Its spectrum of action in relation to generalized epilepsies and seizures remains to be established, and there are no data on its efficacy in monotherapy. At the time of writing, CNB has been prescribed for some 50 000 individuals with DRE and focal epilepsy. A larger number is needed to fully establish its safety profile. It should at all times be introduced slowly to minimize the risk of serious allergic drug reactions. It has clinically meaningful interactions which must be anticipated and managed to maximize tolerability and likelihood of successful treatment. Despite the above, it may well prove to be of major benefit in the treatment of many patients with drug resistant epilepsy.

[Epilepsy and inequality: demographic description and analysis of the difficulty in accessing advanced resources in a population in a small health area]

INTRODUCTION

Epilepsy is a very common neurological disease with high morbidity and mortality. Drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) poses a major therapeutic challenge, even for experts in the field. Despite this, access to advanced resources for this type of patient remains difficult and unequal. The aim of this study is to analyse inequality in a population belonging to a first level hospital.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

An analytical observational cross-sectional study was conducted on epileptic patients attending neurology consultations in Area IX of the Murcian Health Service. Demographic, clinical, therapeutic, prognostic and equity variables are described, and significant differences between different subgroups are analysed.

RESULTS

The study included 68 patients with a mean age of 42.93 years. Focal epilepsy was the main type (64.7%), and the most commonly used drugs were levetiracetam (33.8%), valproic acid (27.9%) and lamotrigine (22.1%). DRE occurred in 18 patients (26.5% of the total) and only four were under active follow-up in an epilepsy unit, meaning that 71% did not have access to a necessary resource (advanced therapeutic gap).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that epilepsy inequality continues to be a problem, especially in certain geographical areas, with a lack of access to advanced care for patients who need it most. The solution can be achieved by increasing human and material resources to improve overall patient care, thus strengthening both referral hospitals and epilepsy units.

Patterns of antiseizure medication utilization in the Human Epilepsy Project

OBJECTIVE

This study was undertaken to ascertain the natural history and patterns of antiseizure medication (ASM) use in newly diagnosed focal epilepsy patients who were initially started on monotherapy.

METHODS

The data were derived from the Human Epilepsy Project. Differences between the durations of the most commonly first prescribed ASM monotherapies were assessed using a Cox proportional hazards model. Subjects were classified into three groups: monotherapy, sequential monotherapy, and polytherapy.

RESULTS

A total of 443 patients were included in the analysis, with a median age of 32 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 20-44) and median follow-up time of 3.2 years (IQR = 2.4-4.2); 161 (36.3%) patients remained on monotherapy with their initially prescribed ASM at the time of their last follow-up. The mean (SEM) and median (IQR) duration that patients stayed on monotherapy with their initial ASM was 2.1 (2.0-2.2) and 1.9 (.3-3.5) years, respectively. The most commonly prescribed initial ASM was levetiracetam (254, 57.3%), followed by lamotrigine (77, 17.4%), oxcarbazepine (38, 8.6%), and carbamazepine (24, 5.4%). Among those who did not remain on the initial monotherapy, 167 (59.2%) transitioned to another ASM as monotherapy (sequential monotherapy) and 115 (40.8%) ended up on polytherapy. Patients remained significantly longer on lamotrigine (mean = 2.8 years, median = 3.1 years) compared to levetiracetam (mean = 2.0 years, median = 1.5 years) as a first prescribed medication (hazard ratio = 1.5, 95% confidence interval = 1.0-2.2). As the study progressed, the proportion of patients on lamotrigine, carbamazepine, and oxcarbazepine as well as other sodium channel agents increased from a little more than one third (154, 34.8%) of patients to more than two thirds (303, 68.4%) of patients.

SIGNIFICANCE

Slightly more than one third of focal epilepsy patients remain on monotherapy with their first prescribed ASM. Approximately three in five patients transition to monotherapy with another ASM, whereas approximately two in five end up on polytherapy. Patients remain on lamotrigine for a longer duration compared to levetiracetam when it is prescribed as the initial monotherapy.

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.

Feasibility of psychological screening in a tertiary epilepsy clinic

OBJECTIVE

People with epilepsy (PWE) have a high prevalence of developing depression and anxiety. The objective is to determine the feasibility of brief screening tools to screen for depression and anxiety in epilepsy, and the predictive factors.

METHOD

This is a cross-sectional study in the neurology clinic in a tertiary teaching hospital in Kuala Lumpur. The screening tools used were the Neurological Disorders Depression Inventory for Epilepsy (NDDI-E) and the General Anxiety Disorder Form (GAD-7).

RESULTS

Five hundred and eighty-five patients were recruited in this study, and 50.8% of them were male, predominantly Chinese (46.7%), with a mean age of seizure onset of 21.8 ± 16.1 years. The majority had focal seizures (75.0%), and 41.9% had seizure remission. There were 15.5% who scored ≥15 in the NDDI-E, and 17.0% had moderate or severe anxiety (scored ≥10 in the GAD-7). In a regression model to predict the NDDI-E score, the age of seizure onset recorded a higher beta value (β = -0.265, p =< 0.001), followed by the duration of epilepsy (β = -0.213, p =< 0.001), use of levetiracetam (LEV) (β = 0.147, p = 0.002), clonazepam (CLZ) (β = 0.127, p = 0.011), and lamotrigine (LTG) (β = 0.125, p = 0.011), number of current antiseizure medications (β = -0.124, p = 0.049), seizure remission for ≥1 year (β = -0.108, p = 0.011), and female (β = 0.082, p = 0.049). For the GAD-7 score, the predictors included current age (β = -0.152, p = 0.001), the use of LEV (β = 0.122, p = 0.011), Indian ethnicity (β = 0.114, p = 0.006), and the use of carbamazepine (β = -0.090, p = 0.043).

CONCLUSION

Implementation of simple psychological screening using self-administered questionnaires was feasible in a busy tertiary epilepsy clinic.

Further advances in epilepsy

In 2017, one of us reviewed advances in epilepsy (Manford in J Neurol 264:1811-1824, 2017). The current paper brings that review up to date and gives a slight change in emphasis. Once again, the story is of evolution rather than revolution. In recognition that most of our current medications act on neurotransmitters or ion channels, and not on the underlying changes in connectivity and pathways, they have been renamed as antiseizure (ASM) medications rather than antiepileptic drugs. Cenobamate is the one newly licensed medication for broader use in focal epilepsy but there have been a number of developments for specific disorders. We review new players and look forward to new developments in the light of evolving underlying science. We look at teratogenicity; old villains and new concerns in which clinicians play a vital role in explaining and balancing the risks. Medical treatment of status epilepticus, long without evidence, has benefitted from high-quality trials to inform practice; like buses, several arriving at once. Surgical treatment continues to be refined with improvements in the pre-surgical evaluation of patients, especially with new imaging techniques. Alternatives including stereotactic radiotherapy have received further focus and targets for palliative stimulation techniques have grown in number. Individuals' autonomy and quality of life continue to be the subject of research with refinement of what clinicians can do to help persons with epilepsy (PWE) achieve control. This includes seizure management but extends to broader considerations of human empowerment, needs and desires, which may be aided by emerging technologies such as seizure detection devices. The role of specialist nurses in improving that quality has been reinforced by specific endorsement from the International League against Epilepsy (ILAE).

Antiseizure medication selection and retention for adult onset focal epilepsy in a Swedish health service region: A population-based cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Historically, approximately half of those with newly diagnosed epilepsy have responded to and tolerated the first antiseizure medication (ASM), but there are few contemporary real-world data. Third-generation ASMs have improved tolerability and are increasingly used according to prescription data. We aimed to describe current ASM selection and retention in adult onset focal epilepsy in western Sweden.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective cohort study was performed at five public neurology care providers in western Sweden (nearly complete coverage in the area). We reviewed 2607 medical charts and included patients diagnosed with nongeneralized epilepsy after January 1, 2020 who had a seizure onset after age 25 years (presumed focal onset) and were started on ASM monotherapy.

RESULTS

A total of 542 patients (median age at seizure onset = 68 years, interquartile range = 52-77) were included. Most patients received levetiracetam (62%) or lamotrigine (35%), with levetiracetam being more common among men and those with structural causes or short epilepsy duration. During follow-up (median = 471.5 days), 463 patients (85%) remained on the first ASM. Fifty-nine (18%) patients discontinued levetiracetam, and 18 (10%) ended treatment with lamotrigine (p = .010), most commonly because of side effects. In a multivariable Cox regression model, the discontinuation risk was higher for levetiracetam than lamotrigine (adjusted hazard ratio = 2.01, 95% confidence interval = 1.16-3.51).

SIGNIFICANCE

Levetiracetam and lamotrigine were the dominating first ASMs for adult onset focal epilepsy in our region, indicating good awareness of problems with enzyme induction or teratogenicity of older drugs. The most striking finding is the high retention rates, perhaps reflecting a shift toward an older epilepsy population, higher tolerability of newer ASMs, or suboptimal follow-up. The finding that treatment retention differed among patients receiving levetiracetam and lamotrigine aligns with the recent SANAD II results. It suggests lamotrigine may be underutilized in our region and that education efforts are needed to ensure it is considered the first choice more often.

Sustainability of seizure reduction and seizure control with adjunctive cenobamate: Post hoc analysis of a phase 3, open-label study

OBJECTIVE

In this post hoc analysis of a subset of patients from a long-term, open-label phase 3 study, we assessed ≥50%, ≥75%, ≥90%, and 100% seizure reduction and sustainability of these responses with cenobamate using a time-to-event analytical approach.

METHODS

Of 240 patients with uncontrolled focal seizures who had adequate seizure data available, 214 completed the 12-week titration phase and received ≥1 dose of cenobamate in the maintenance phase (max dose 400 mg/day) and were included in this post hoc analysis. Among patients who met an initial given seizure-reduction level (≥50%, ≥75%, ≥90%, or 100%), sustainability of that response was measured using a time-to-event methodology. An event was defined as the occurrence of a study visit at which the seizure frequency during the interval since the prior study visit exceeded the initially attained reduction level. Study visits during the maintenance phase occurred at 3-month intervals.

RESULTS

Of the 214 patients analyzed, 188 (88%), 177 (83%), 160 (75%), and 145 (68%) met ≥50%, ≥75%, ≥90%, and 100% seizure-reduction responses, respectively, for at least one study visit interval during the maintenance phase. The median (95% confidence interval [CI]) time to first visit without a ≥50% seizure reduction was not reached by 30 months of follow-up (53% of patients maintained their initial ≥50% seizure reduction). Median (95% CI) time to first visit without sustaining the initial ≥75%, ≥90%, or 100% seizure reduction was 13.0 (7.5-21.9) months, 7.5 (5.4-11.6) months, and 7.0 (5.3-10.4) months, respectively. Among the 145 patients who had 100% seizure reduction during at least one study visit, 22% remained seizure-free for at least 30 months and 63% had ≤3 study visits with seizures.

SIGNIFICANCE

Adjunctive treatment with cenobamate led to sustained seizure reductions during the maintenance phase of the phase 3 safety study.

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.

GWAS meta-analysis of over 29,000 people with epilepsy identifies 26 risk loci and subtype-specific genetic architecture

Epilepsy is a highly heritable disorder affecting over 50 million people worldwide, of which about one-third are resistant to current treatments. Here we report a multi-ancestry genome-wide association study including 29,944 cases, stratified into three broad categories and seven subtypes of epilepsy, and 52,538 controls. We identify 26 genome-wide significant loci, 19 of which are specific to genetic generalized epilepsy (GGE). We implicate 29 likely causal genes underlying these 26 loci. SNP-based heritability analyses show that common variants explain between 39.6% and 90% of genetic risk for GGE and its subtypes. Subtype analysis revealed markedly different genetic architectures between focal and generalized epilepsies. Gene-set analyses of GGE signals implicate synaptic processes in both excitatory and inhibitory neurons in the brain. Prioritized candidate genes overlap with monogenic epilepsy genes and with targets of current antiseizure medications. Finally, we leverage our results to identify alternate drugs with predicted efficacy if repurposed for epilepsy treatment.

Perampanel and lacosamide monotherapy in pediatric patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy: A prospective study evaluating efficacy, tolerability, and behavior

PURPOSE

Perampanel (PER) and lacosamide (LCM) are the new third-generation anti-seizure medications (ASMs) that were approved for the monotherapy of focal epilepsy in children over four years of age in China, in 2021. Very few studies have analyzed the application of PER monotherapy among pediatric patients aged ≥four years, and no study compared the efficacy and tolerability of PER monotherapy with LCM monotherapy in pediatric patients with focal epilepsy. The present study aimed to investigate the efficacy, tolerability, and effect on behavior and emotion of PER and LCM as monotherapy in pediatric patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy, which is beneficial for clinicians to have more choices to treat pediatric patients with focal epilepsy.

METHODS

This was a prospective, single-center, observational study that involved pediatric patients (disease onset age ≥four years) with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy treated with PER or LCM as primary monotherapy. Outcomes included retention, being responders, and seizure-free rates after 3, 6, and 12 months. Adverse events (AEs) were noticed throughout the follow-up period. Behavioral outcomes were evaluated with Achenbach Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL/4-16) at baseline and after three and six months.

RESULTS

Using randomization, 60 patients receiving PER (31 females, 29 males, median age: 7.79 [5.34, 10.16] years, median dose: 3.0 [2.0, 4.0] mg/day) and 60 patients receiving LCM (25 females, 35 males, median age: 7.72 [5.91, 10.72] years, median dose: 150.0 [100.0, 200.0] mg/day) were enrolled in the study. At the 12-month follow-up, the retention rates in the PER and LCM groups, both were 90.4%, and the responder rates were 65.4% and 71.2%, while seizure-free rates were 57.7% and 67.3%, respectively. There were no significant differences in the retention, responder and seizure-free rates between the two groups (P > 0.05). There were no significant differences in the responder rates between patients with BECTS, abnormal brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), or types of seizure in the two groups (P > 0.05). In the PER group, 28.8% (15/52) of patients experienced AEs, of which the most frequently reported were irritability (n = 7; 13.5%), dizziness (n = 5; 9.6%), somnolence (n = 3; 5.8%), ataxia (n = 1; 1.9%), headache (n = 1; 1.9%), and rash (n = 1; 1.9%). In the LCM group, 15.4% (8/52) of the patients had AEs, including headache (n = 4; 7.5%), dizziness (n = 4; 7.5%), nausea (n = 2; 3.8%), somnolence (n = 2; 3.8%), irritability (n = 1; 1.9%), stomach ache (n = 1; 1.9%), and vomiting (n = 1; 1.9%). The incidence of irritability was significantly higher in the PER group than in the LCM group (13.5% vs. 1.9%, P = 0.031), which occurred mainly within eight weeks after drug administration. Patients with irritability were not dangerous to surrounding people by the assessment of parental observation in the life. And the symptoms were relieved spontaneously within a few months. The outcomes of total scores, internalizing scores, and externalizing scores of the CBCL did not show statistically significant differences in the PER and LCM groups between baseline and three and six months. Characteristics of behavior and emotion did not have substantial changes in patients treated with PER and LCM monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study documented similar good effectiveness and good tolerance of PER and LCM as monotherapy in pediatric patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy and showed no behavioral or emotional impact, as assessed by the CBCL. Though the incidence of irritability with PER monotherapy may be higher than that with LCM monotherapy soon after medication initiation, this side effect appears to resolve spontaneously within a few months. At present, this study was the first research about PER and LCM monotherapy in pediatric patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy evaluating efficacy, tolerability, and behavior in China.

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.

What neurologists can do for neuro-oncology patients

Neuro-oncology is a branch of medical science concerned with managing central nervous system tumours and neurological complications of cancer. Patients with brain tumours need a multidisciplinary approach to their care and neurologists can play a key part within that team. This review shows how neurologists can contribute to the care of patients with neuro-oncological disease at various points during the illness, including at initial diagnosis, during symptom management and at end of life assisting with palliative seizure management. The review focuses on brain tumour-related epilepsy, the complications of brain tumour treatments and the neurological complications of systemic cancer treatments including immunotherapies.

Levetiracetam, from broad-spectrum use to precision prescription: A narrative review and expert opinion

Levetiracetam (LEV) is an antiseizure medication (ASM) whose mechanism of action involves the modulation of neurotransmitters release through binding to the synaptic vesicle glycoprotein 2A. It is a broad-spectrum ASM displaying favorable pharmacokinetic and tolerability profiles. Since its introduction in 1999, it has been widely prescribed, becoming the first-line treatment for numerous epilepsy syndromes and clinical scenarios. However, this might have resulted in overuse. Increasing evidence, including the recently published SANAD II trials, suggests that other ASMs are reasonable therapeutic options for generalized and focal epilepsies. Not infrequently, these ASMs show better safety and effectiveness profiles compared to LEV (partially due to the latter's well-known cognitive and behavioral adverse effects, present in up to 20% of patients). Moreover, it has been shown that the underlying etiology of epilepsy is significantly linked to ASMs response in particular scenarios, highlighting the importance of an etiology-based ASM choice. In the case of LEV, it has demonstrated an optimal effectiveness in Alzheimer's disease, Down syndrome, and PCDH19-related epilepsies whereas, in other etiologies such as malformations of cortical development, it may show negligible effects. This narrative review analyzes the current evidence related to the use of LEV for the treatment of seizures. Illustrative clinical scenarios and practical decision-making approaches are also addressed, therefore aiming to define a rational use of this ASM.

Adapted Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guidelines for Diagnosis and Treatment of Epilepsies in Children: A Tertiary Children's Hospital Update

HYPOTHESIS AND/OR BACKGROUND

We recently updated and merged the adapted clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) for the diagnosis and treatment of children with epilepsy of a tertiary-level hospital. Medical knowledge is always evolving. As a result, it is critical to revisit the clinical standards on a frequent basis to ensure that the best services are offered to the target receivers. The purpose of this article was to update and merge the CPGs at Alexandria University Children Hospital (AUCH) for the diagnosis (2014) and treatment (2016) of children with epilepsy to unify and standardize the practice for better care and outcome.

METHODS

This review and update CPG project was initiated by assembling a Guideline Review Group (GRG). The GRG conducted focus group discussions and decided to search any published updates of the recommendations of the previously identified high-quality and evidence-based CPG developed by the SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network) and to merge the two previous local CPGs under one comprehensive CPG for full management of epilepsy in children. The high quality of the selected source CPG from SIGN was based on quality assessment of CPGs undertaken previously using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II Instrument. The GRG followed the Checklist for the Reporting of Updated Guidelines (CheckUp), which is the CPG tool recommended by the Enhancing the Quality and Transparency of health Research Network for reporting of updated CPGs in addition to the RIGHT-Ad@pt Checklist for Adapted CPGs. The finalized updated CPG draft was sent to the external reviewer group topic experts.

RESULTS

The group updated 10 main categories of recommendations from one source CPG (SIGN). The recommendations included (1) epilepsy diagnosis; (2) recognition, identification, and referral; (3) pharmacological treatment of epilepsy and epilepsy syndromes; (4) nonpharmacological treatment of epilepsy and epilepsy syndromes; (5) managing pharmacoresistant epilepsy; (6) management of epilepsy in special groups; (7) medications; (8) children and caregiver education and support; (9) comorbidities and mortality; and (10) transitional care from pediatric to adult care services.

CONCLUSIONS

The finalized CPG provides evidence-based guidance to health care providers in AUCH for the diagnosis and management of epilepsy in children. The study also established the significance of a collaborative clinical and methodological expert group for the update of CPGs, as well as the usability of the "CheckUp" and "RIGHT-Ad@pt" CPG Tools.

Zonisamide improves Fas/FasL-mediated apoptosis and inflammation in a degenerative cervical myelopathy rat model

Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is a severe condition of the spinal cord caused by chronic compression. However, no studies to date have examined the effects of zonisamide (ZNS) on DCM via the Fas/FasL-mediated pathway. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of ZNS on a DCM rat model and to explore the potential mechanisms. First, 40 adult Sprague-Dawley rats were used to establish the DCM rat model and were individually divided into four groups: the Sham group, DCM model group (DCM), ZNS group (DCM model rats treated with ZNS, 30 mg/kg/day), and ZNS + CD95 group (DCM model rats treated with ZNS and CD95). Histopathology injury and cell apoptosis, Fas and Fas ligand (FasL) expression and Fas/FasL relative protein levels were detected by hematoxylin and eosin staining, TUNEL assay, and immunofluorescence and western blotting, respectively. The results of our study demonstrated that ZNS could promote motor recovery while reversing histopathological injury and cell apoptosis in DCM rats. Moreover, Iba-1, Fas and FasL expression in DCM rats was decreased, accompanied by a decrease in cleaved caspase-3/caspase-3, cleaved caspase-8/caspase-8, cleaved caspase-9/caspase-9, cleaved caspase-10/caspase-10 and B-cell lymphoma-2 (Bcl-2)/Bcl-2 associated X (Bax) levels. All these results revealed that ZNS attenuates DCM injury in a rat model via the regulation of Fas and FasL signaling. Our study indicated that ZNS had beneficial effects on DCM and thus provided a novel theoretical approach for subsequent academic and clinical research on DCM injury.

Perampanel Monotherapy for Focal and Generalized Epilepsy in Clinical Practice

Objectives. To investigate the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of perampanel (PER) when used as monotherapy to treat focal or generalized epilepsy in everyday clinical practice, using data from the PERMIT study. Methods. PERMIT was a pooled analysis of 44 real-world studies from 17 countries, in which people with focal and generalized epilepsy were treated with PER. This post hoc analysis included people with epilepsy (PWE) from PERMIT who were treated with PER monotherapy at baseline. Retention and effectiveness were assessed after 3, 6, and 12 months. Effectiveness assessments included ≥50% responder rate and seizure freedom rate (no seizures since at least the prior visit). Safety and tolerability were assessed by evaluating adverse events (AEs) and discontinuation due to AEs. Results. Overall, 268 PWE were treated with PER monotherapy at baseline. Retention was assessed for 168 PWE, effectiveness for 183 PWE, and safety and tolerability for 197 PWE. Retention rates were 91.1%, 87.3%, and 73.3% at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. At 12 months, responder rates were 84.2% overall, 82.9% in PWE with only focal-onset seizures at baseline, and 88.0% in those with only generalized-onset seizures at baseline; corresponding freedom rates were 62.9%, 57.7%, and 80.0%, respectively. AEs were reported for 45.2% of PWE. The most frequently reported AEs (≥5% of PWE) were dizziness/vertigo (16.8%), irritability (11.2%), somnolence (9.1%), and depression (6.6%). Over 12 months, 13.7% discontinued due to AEs. Conclusions. PER was effective when used as monotherapy in clinical practice, particularly in those with generalized-onset seizures, and was generally well tolerated.

Synthesis of Molecularly Imprinted Polymers Based on a New Monomer "2-(4-Vinylphenyl) Quinoline-4-Carboxylic Acid" for the Selective Solid-Phase Extraction of Lamotrigine

A new molecularly imprinted polymers (MIPs) have been prepared for the high selective extraction of lamotrigine (LTG), a widely used antiepileptic drug, in human serum. The MIPs were polymerized by bulk polymerization using our synthesized compound, 2-(4-vinylphenyl) quinolin-4-carboxylic acid, as functional monomer, which achieved better adsorption specificity than universal MIPs. Then, the molecularly imprinted solid phase extraction (MISPE) based on this material was coupled with high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) for the detection of LTG in human serum. The results of method validation showed that the developed method presented a good precision and accuracy, and the linearity was in the range of 1.50-40.00 mg/mL with the limit of quantitation (LOQ) at 0.20 mg/mL. The recovery ranged from 80.8% to 83.8% with RSD ranges from 5.5% to 11.1%. The validated method was successfully used to determine the concentration of LTG in human simulate serum samples.

Antiepileptic drugs for treating seizures in people with brain tumours

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows:

To compare the efficacy and tolerability of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) taken as monotherapy or add‐on therapy for seizures in people with brain tumours.

Bonaventura C, Marras CE, Palestini C, Ferlazzo E, Venturelli E, Dainese F, Martella F, Paladin F, Villani F, Capizzi G, Napoleoni L, Stanzani L, Stragapede L, Zummo L, Balducci M, Eoli M, Rizzi M, Vernaleone M, Messina R, Vittorini R, Gasparini S, Ius T, Cianci V, Manfioli V, Mariani V, Capovilla G. First-line levetiracetam versus enzyme-inducing antiseizure medication in glioma patients with epilepsy

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to directly compare the effectiveness of first-line monotherapy levetiracetam (LEV) versus enzyme-inducing antiseizure medications (EIASMs) in glioma patients.

METHODS

In this nationwide retrospective observational cohort study, Grade 2-4 glioma patients were included, with a maximum duration of follow-up of 36 months. Primary outcome was antiseizure medication (ASM) treatment failure for any reason, and secondary outcomes were treatment failure due to uncontrolled seizures and due to adverse effects. For estimation of the association between ASM treatment and ASM treatment failure, multivariate cause-specific cox proportional hazard models were estimated, adjusting for potential confounders.

RESULTS

In the original cohort, a total of 808 brain tumor patients with epilepsy were included, of whom 109 glioma patients were prescribed first-line LEV and 183 glioma patients first-line EIASMs. The EIASM group had a significantly higher risk of treatment failure for any reason compared to LEV (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 1.82, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.20-2.75, p = .005). Treatment failure due to uncontrolled seizures did not differ significantly between EIASMs and LEV (aHR = 1.32, 95% CI = .78-2.25, p = .300), but treatment failure due to adverse effects differed significantly (aHR = 4.87, 95% CI = 1.89-12.55, p = .001).

SIGNIFICANCE

In this study, it was demonstrated that LEV had a significantly better effectiveness (i.e., less ASM treatment failure for any reason or due to adverse effects) compared to EIASMs, supporting the current neuro-oncology guideline recommendations to avoid EIASMs in glioma patients.

Antiseizure medications (antiepileptic drugs) in adults: starting, monitoring and stopping

Up to 10% of people living to 80 years of age have one or more seizures; and many will not require anti-seizure medication (ASMs). In 85% of patients, the diagnosis comes from the history of the index event. One-third of patients with an apparent "first seizure" have previous events, changing their diagnosis to epilepsy. Targeted investigations are important for classification and risk prediction. Patients with a low risk of seizure recurrence are not usually offered ASM treatment. High-risk patients have multiple seizures, neurological deficits, intellectual disability and/or relevant abnormal investigations; and are offered ASMs. Individual factors modulate this decision-making. Future integrated technologies offer the game-changing potential for seizure monitoring and prediction, but are not yet robust, convenient or affordable. Therapeutic drug monitoring in patients taking ASMs may confirm ASM toxicity, or when non-adherence, malabsorption, or rapid metabolism are suspected causes of breakthrough seizures. They are less useful when these factors are intermittent or irregular. Current evidence does not favour routine monitoring of serum levels, as it neither reliably predicts control, relapse, or adverse effects. The decision to discontinue ASM should follow a full discussion with the patient of risks and benefits. Along with population risk factors for seizure recurrence, the patient's lifestyle and preferences must be considered. ASM are usually discontinued in a slow step-wise fashion, one at a time, after at least two years of remission. Seizure recurrence risk plateaus only after 2 years following ASM discontinuation, and patients need access to specialist follow-up over that period.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Poststroke Epilepsy: Where Do We Stand?

Purpose of Review

Stroke is the most common cause of seizures and epilepsy in older adults. This educational paper aims to give an update on current clinical aspects of diagnosis and treatment of poststroke epilepsy.

Recent Findings

Regarding epileptic seizures related to stroke, it is important to distinguish between acute symptomatic seizures and unprovoked seizures as they differ in their risk for seizure recurrence. In fact, after a single unprovoked poststroke seizure, a diagnosis of epilepsy can be made because there is a greater than 60% risk for further seizures. Clinical models that can predict the development of epilepsy after a stroke have been successfully established. However, treatment with anti-seizure medications is advised only after a first unprovoked poststroke seizure, as current treatments are not known to be effective for primary prevention. The management of poststroke epilepsy requires consideration of aspects such as age, drug-drug interactions and secondary vascular prophylaxis, yet evidence for the use of anti-seizure medications specifically in poststroke epilepsy is limited.

Summary

This text reviews the epidemiology and risk factors for poststroke epilepsy, explains the role of EEG and neuroimaging in patients with stroke and seizures and provides an overview on the clinical management of stroke-related acute symptomatic seizures and poststroke epilepsy.

Management of epilepsy in brain tumor patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

A concise review of recent findings in brain tumor-related epilepsy (BTRE), with focus on the effect of antitumor treatment on seizure control and the management of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs).

RECENT FINDINGS

Isocitrate dehydrogenase mutation and its active metabolite d -2-hydroxyglutarate seem important contributing factors to epileptogenesis in BTRE. A beneficial effect of antitumor treatment (i.e. surgery, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy) on seizure control has mainly been demonstrated in low-grade glioma. AED prophylaxis in seizure-naïve BTRE patients is not recommended, but AED treatment should be initiated after a first seizure has occurred. Comparative efficacy randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are currently lacking, but second-generation AED levetiracetam seems the preferred choice in BTRE. Levetiracetam lacks significant drug-drug interactions, has shown favorable efficacy compared to valproic acid in BTRE, generally causes no hematological or neurocognitive functioning adverse effects, but caution should be exercised with regard to psychiatric adverse effects. Potential add-on AEDs in case of uncontrolled seizures include lacosamide, perampanel, and valproic acid. Ultimately, in the end-of-life phase when oral intake of medication is hampered, benzodiazepines via nonoral administration routes are potential alternatives.

SUMMARY

Management of seizures in BTRE is complex and with currently available evidence levetiracetam seems the preferred choice. Comparative efficacy RCTs in BTRE are warranted.

The effect of levetiracetam on depression and anti-oxidant activity in patients with epilepsy

Background: Levetiracetam (LEV) is approved for treating epilepsy. The current evidence shows that LEV can cause behavioral problems such as depression. It is well-known that depression is associated with oxidative stress. Therefore, we conducted this study to assess the influence of LEV on depression severity and anti-oxidant status. Methods: In this prospective longitudinal study, 50 patients with diagnosis of epilepsy on LEV were included. We used Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) to assess depression severity. The serum levels of zinc and glutathione were measured as anti-oxidant markers. These variables were evaluated at the baseline and 3 months after the commencement of LEV. Results: A total of 30 patients finished the follow-up. Among them, 21 patients were women. The mean age at baseline was 28.76 ± 11.37 (range: 16-68 years). The severity of depression at the last follow-up was significantly higher than the baseline. We observed a decrease in the serum levels of zinc and glutathione, though they were not statistically significant. Conclusion: Our results suggest that LEV can increase the risk of depression in patients with epilepsy. This study also suggests that zinc depletion can be induced through act of LEV. Further studies are needed to validate these findings.

Brain tumor related epilepsy: pathophysiological approaches and rational management of antiseizure medication

Background

Brain tumor related epilepsy (BTRE) is a common complication of cerebral tumors and its incidence is highly dependent on the type of tumor, ranging from 10–15% in brain metastases to > 80% in low grade gliomas. Clinical management is challenging and has to take into account aspects beyond the treatment of non-tumoral epilepsy.

Main body

Increasing knowledge about the pathophysiology of BTRE, particularly on glutamatergic mechanisms of oncogenesis and epileptogenesis, might influence management of anti-tumor and BTRE treatment in the future. The first seizure implies the diagnosis of epilepsy in patients with brain tumors. Due to the lack of prospective randomized trials in BTRE, general recommendations for focal epilepsies currently apply concerning the initiation of antiseizure medication (ASM). Non-enzyme inducing ASM is preferable. Prospective trials are needed to evaluate, if AMPA inhibitors like perampanel possess anti-tumor effects. ASM withdrawal has to be weighed very carefully against the risk of seizure recurrence, but can be achievable in selected patients. Permission to drive is possible for some patients with BTRE under well-defined conditions, but requires thorough neurological, radiological, ophthalmological and neuropsychological examination.

Conclusion

An evolving knowledge on pathophysiology of BTRE might influence future therapy. Randomized trials on ASM in BTRE with reliable endpoints are needed. Management of withdrawal of ASMs and permission to drive demands thorough diagnostic as well as neurooncological and epileptological expertise.

Dose Adjustment of Concomitant Antiseizure Medications During Cenobamate Treatment: Expert Opinion Consensus Recommendations

INTRODUCTION

Our objective was to provide expert consensus recommendations to improve treatment tolerability through dose adjustments of concomitant antiseizure medications (ASMs) during addition of cenobamate to existing ASM therapy in adult patients with uncontrolled focal seizures.

METHODS

A panel of seven epileptologists experienced in the use of ASMs, including cenobamate, used a modified Delphi process to reach consensus. The panelists discussed tolerability issues with concomitant ASMs during cenobamate titration and practical strategies for dose adjustments that may prevent or mitigate adverse effects. The resulting recommendations consider concomitant ASM dose level and specify proactive (prior to report of an adverse effect) and reactive (in response to report of an adverse effect) dose adjustment suggestions based on concomitant ASM pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions with cenobamate. Specific dose adjustment recommendations are provided.

RESULTS

We recommend proactively lowering the dose of clobazam, phenytoin, and phenobarbital due to their known drug-drug interactions with cenobamate, and lacosamide due to a pharmacodynamic interaction with cenobamate, to prevent adverse effects during cenobamate titration. Reactive lowering of a concomitant ASM dose is sufficient for other ASMs at standard dosing owing to quick resolution of adverse effects. For carbamazepine and lamotrigine doses exceeding the upper end of standard dosing (e.g., carbamazepine, greater than 1200 mg/day; lamotrigine, greater than 500 mg/day), we encourage consideration of proactive dose reduction at cenobamate 200 mg/day to prevent potential adverse effects. All dose reductions for adverse effects can be repeated every 2 weeks as dictated by the adverse effects. At cenobamate 200 mg/day, we recommend that patients be evaluated for marked improvement of seizures and further dose reductions be considered to reduce potentially unnecessary polypharmacy.

CONCLUSION

The primary goal of the recommended dose reductions of concomitant ASMs is to prevent or resolve adverse effects, thereby allowing cenobamate to reach the optimal dose to achieve the maximal potential of improving seizure control.

Cardiac morbidity and mortality associated with the use of lamotrigine

OBJECTIVE

The US Food and Drug Administration recently issued a warning against the use of the antiseizure medication lamotrigine in people at risk of cardiac rhythm and conduction abnormalities. This study assessed the risk of cardiac morbidity and mortality in new users of lamotrigine.

METHODS

In a Danish population-based cohort study, we followed cohort members aged ≥15 years for the first 2 years after they initiated lamotrigine therapy. The main outcomes were cardiac conduction disorders in people without pre-existing cardiac morbidity and all-cause mortality in people with pre-existing cardiac morbidity. Cox proportional hazards models provided hazard ratios (HRs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for comparison of the risk in current versus past users of lamotrigine.

RESULTS

There were 91 949 (36 618 males [39.8%]) new users of lamotrigine (median age = 45.7 years, interquartile range = 32.0-60.2 years). Among users without pre-existing cardiac disease (n = 86 769), 194 (.23%) developed a cardiac conduction disorder. Comparison of the risk in current and past lamotrigine treatment periods yielded an adjusted HR of new onset cardiac conduction disorder of 1.03 (95% CI = .76-1.40). Among users with pre-existing cardiac disease (n = 5180), 1150 (22.2%) died. Comparison of the risk in current and past lamotrigine treatment periods yielded an adjusted HR for all cause-mortality of 1.05 (95% CI = .93-1.19).

SIGNIFICANCE

In this large population-based study, lamotrigine use was associated neither with a risk of cardiac conduction disorders in people without pre-existing cardiac morbidity nor with all-cause mortality in people with pre-existing cardiac morbidity.

Pregabalin Add-On vs. Dose Increase in Levetiracetam Add-On Treatment: A Real-Life Trial in Dogs With Drug-Resistant Epilepsy

Epilepsy is a common neurological disorder affecting 0.6–0.75% of dogs in veterinary practice. Treatment is frequently complicated by the occurrence of drug-resistant epilepsy and cluster seizures in dogs with idiopathic epilepsy. Only few studies are available to guide treatment choices beyond licensed veterinary drugs. The aim of the study was to compare antiseizure efficacy and tolerability of two add-on treatment strategies in dogs with drug-resistant idiopathic epilepsy. The study design was a prospective, open-label, non-blinded, comparative treatment trial. Treatment success was defined as a 3-fold extension of the longest baseline interseizure interval and to a minimum of 3 months. To avoid prolonged adherence to a presumably ineffective treatment strategy, dog owners could leave the study after the third day with generalized seizures if the interseizure interval failed to show a relevant increase. Twenty-six dogs (mean age 5.5 years, mean seizure frequency 4/month) with drug-resistant idiopathic epilepsy and a history of cluster seizures were included. Dogs received either add-on treatment with pregabalin (PGB) 4 mg/kg twice daily (14 dogs) or a dose increase in levetiracetam (LEV) add-on treatment (12 dogs). Thirteen dogs in the PGB group had drug levels within the therapeutic range for humans. Two dogs in the PGB group (14.3%; 2/14) and one dog in the LEV group (8.3%; 1/12) achieved treatment success with long seizure-free intervals from 122 to 219 days but then relapsed to their early seizure frequency 10 months after the study inclusion. The overall low success rates with both treatment strategies likely reflect a real-life situation in canine drug-resistant idiopathic epilepsy in everyday veterinary practice. These results delineate the need for research on better pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic treatment strategies in dogs with drug-resistant epilepsy.

Transcutaneous Auricular Vagus Nerve Stimulation Differently Modifies Functional Brain Networks of Subjects With Different Epilepsy Types

Epilepsy types differ by pathophysiology and prognosis. Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) is a non-invasive treatment option in epilepsy. Nevertheless, its mode of action and impact on different types of epilepsy are still unknown. We investigated whether short-term taVNS differently affects local and global characteristics of EEG-derived functional brain networks in different types of epilepsy. Thirty subjects (nine with focal epilepsy, 11 with generalized epilepsy, and 10 without epilepsy or seizures) underwent a 3-h continuous EEG-recording (1 h pre-stimulation, 1 h taVNS stimulation, 1 h post-stimulation) from which we derived evolving functional brain networks. We assessed—in a time-resolved manner—important global (topological, robustness, and stability properties) and local (centralities of vertices and edges) network characteristics. Compared to the subjects with focal epilepsies and without epilepsy, those with generalized epilepsies clearly presented with different topological properties of their functional brain network already at rest. Furthermore, subjects with focal and generalized epilepsies reacted differently to the stimulation, expressed as different taVNS-induced immediate and enduring reorganization of global network characteristics. On the local network scale, no discernible spatial pattern could be detected, which points to a rather unspecific and generalized modification of brain activity. Assessing functional brain network characteristics can provide additional information for differentiating between focal and generalized epilepsy. TaVNS-related modifications of global network characteristics clearly differ between epilepsy types. Impact of such a non–pharmaceutical intervention on clinical decision-making in the treatment of different epilepsy types needs to be assessed in future studies.

Severity of Epilepsy and Response to Antiseizure Medications in Individuals with Multiple Sclerosis: Analysis of a Real-World Dataset

Background and objectives:

Epilepsy is an important comorbidity that affects outcomes for people with multiple sclerosis (MS). However, it is unclear if seizure severity among individuals with coexistence of multiple sclerosis and epilepsy (MS+E) is higher than in those with other focal epilepsies. Our goal was to compare the overall severity of epilepsy in individuals with MS+E versus those with focal epilepsy without MS (E-MS) as defined by seizure-related healthcare utilization, frequency and duration of status epilepticus, and frequency of antiseizure medication (ASM) regimen changes.

Methods:

In this hypothesis-generating study, we analyzed a U.S. commercial nationwide de-identified claims dataset with > 86 million individuals between 1/1/2008 and 8/31/2019. Using validated algorithms, we identified adults with E-MS and those with MS+E. We compared the number and length of seizure-related hospital admissions, the number of claims and unique days with claims for status epilepticus, and the rates of ASM regimen changes between the MS+E and the E-MS groups.

Results:

During the study period, 66,708 individuals with E-MS and 537 with MS+E had ≥ 2 years of coverage after their initial diagnosis of epilepsy. There was no difference between the MS+E and E-MS groups in the percentage of individuals admitted for seizures and/or status epilepticus. However, MS+E with seizure-related admissions had more admissions and longer hospital stays than those with E-MS. MS+E who experienced status epilepticus had more unique days with status epilepticus claims compared to E-MS. MS+E were more likely to have ASM regimen changes in Year 2 after the initial diagnosis of epilepsy and had more ASM changes during Year 2 compared to E-MS. Among individuals with MS+E, there were no differences in our measures of seizure severity for those treated with sodium channel blockers/modulators versus other ASM classes.

Discussion:

This study supports the notion that individuals with MS+E can have more severe epilepsy than those with E-MS. Seizure severity among individuals with MS+E treated with sodium-channel blockers/modulators versus other ASM classes shows no significant differences.

Classification of evidence:

This study provides Class III evidence that individuals with MS+E can have more severe epilepsy than those with E-MS.