Cognitive impairment in new cases of epilepsy randomly assigned to carbamazepine, phenytoin and sodium valproate

Brivaracetam and Levetiracetam Suppress Astroglial L-Glutamate Release through Hemichannel via Inhibition of Synaptic Vesicle Protein

To explore the pathophysiological mechanisms of antiseizure and adverse behavioural/psychiatric effects of brivaracetam and levetiracetam, in the present study, we determined the effects of brivaracetam and levetiracetam on astroglial L-glutamate release induced by artificial high-frequency oscillation (HFO) bursts using ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography. Additionally, the effects of brivaracetam and levetiracetam on protein expressions of connexin43 (Cx43) and synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A) in the plasma membrane of primary cultured rat astrocytes were determined using a capillary immunoblotting system. Acutely artificial fast-ripple HFO (500 Hz) burst stimulation use-dependently increased L-glutamate release through Cx43-containing hemichannels without affecting the expression of Cx43 or SV2A in the plasma membrane, whereas acute physiological ripple HFO (200 Hz) stimulation did not affect astroglial L-glutamate release or expression of Cx43 or SV2A. Contrarily, subchronic ripple HFO and acute pathological fast-ripple HFO (500 Hz) stimulations use-dependently increased L-glutamate release through Cx43-containing hemichannels and Cx43 expression in the plasma membrane. Subchronic fast-ripple HFO-evoked stimulation produced ectopic expression of SV2A in the plasma membrane, but subchronic ripple HFO stimulation did not generate ectopic SV2A. Subchronic administration of brivaracetam and levetiracetam concentration-dependently suppressed fast-ripple HFO-induced astroglial L-glutamate release and expression of Cx43 and SV2A in the plasma membrane. In contrast, subchronic ripple HFO-evoked stimulation induced astroglial L-glutamate release, and Cx43 expression in the plasma membrane was inhibited by subchronic levetiracetam administration, but was not affected by brivaracetam. These results suggest that brivaracetam and levetiracetam inhibit epileptogenic fast-ripple HFO-induced activated astroglial transmission associated with hemichannels. In contrast, the inhibitory effect of therapeutic-relevant concentrations of levetiracetam on physiological ripple HFO-induced astroglial responses probably contributes to the adverse behavioural/psychiatric effects of levetiracetam.

Antiepileptic drug monotherapy for epilepsy: a network meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in 2017. Epilepsy is a common neurological condition with a worldwide prevalence of around 1%. Approximately 60% to 70% of people with epilepsy will achieve a longer-term remission from seizures, and most achieve that remission shortly after starting antiepileptic drug treatment. Most people with epilepsy are treated with a single antiepileptic drug (monotherapy) and current guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom for adults and children recommend carbamazepine or lamotrigine as first-line treatment for focal onset seizures and sodium valproate for generalised onset seizures; however, a range of other antiepileptic drug (AED) treatments are available, and evidence is needed regarding their comparative effectiveness in order to inform treatment choices.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the time to treatment failure, remission and first seizure of 12 AEDs (carbamazepine, phenytoin, sodium valproate, phenobarbitone, oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, gabapentin, topiramate, eventrate, zonisamide, eslicarbazepine acetate, lacosamide) currently used as monotherapy in children and adults with focal onset seizures (simple focal, complex focal or secondary generalised) or generalised tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalised seizure types (absence, myoclonus).

SEARCH METHODS

For the latest update, we searched the following databases on 12 April 2021: the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), which includes PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialised Register and MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to April 09, 2021). We handsearched relevant journals and contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators and experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of a monotherapy design in adults or children with focal onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual participant data (IPD) and network meta-analysis (NMA) review. Our primary outcome was 'time to treatment failure', and our secondary outcomes were 'time to achieve 12-month remission', 'time to achieve six-month remission', and 'time to first seizure post-randomisation'. We performed frequentist NMA to combine direct evidence with indirect evidence across the treatment network of 12 drugs. We investigated inconsistency between direct 'pairwise' estimates and NMA results via node splitting. Results are presented as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and we assessed the certainty of the evidence using the CiNeMA approach, based on the GRADE framework. We have also provided a narrative summary of the most commonly reported adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

IPD were provided for at least one outcome of this review for 14,789 out of a total of 22,049 eligible participants (67% of total data) from 39 out of the 89 eligible trials (43% of total trials). We could not include IPD from the remaining 50 trials in analysis for a variety of reasons, such as being unable to contact an author or sponsor to request data, data being lost or no longer available, cost and resources required to prepare data being prohibitive, or local authority or country-specific restrictions. No IPD were available from a single trial of eslicarbazepine acetate, so this AED could not be included in the NMA. Network meta-analysis showed high-certainty evidence that for our primary outcome, 'time to treatment failure', for individuals with focal seizures; lamotrigine performs better than most other treatments in terms of treatment failure for any reason and due to adverse events, including the other first-line treatment carbamazepine; HRs (95% CIs) for treatment failure for any reason for lamotrigine versus: eventrate 1.01 (0.88 to 1.20), zonisamide 1.18 (0.96 to 1.44), lacosamide 1.19 (0.90 to 1.58), carbamazepine 1.26 (1.10 to 1.44), oxcarbazepine 1.30 (1.02 to 1.66), sodium valproate 1.35 (1.09 to 1.69), phenytoin 1.44 (1.11 to 1.85), topiramate 1.50 (1.23 to 1.81), gabapentin 1.53 (1.26 to 1.85), phenobarbitone 1.97 (1.45 to 2.67). No significant difference between lamotrigine and eventrate was shown for any treatment failure outcome, and both AEDs seemed to perform better than all other AEDs. For people with generalised onset seizures, evidence was more limited and of moderate certainty; no other treatment performed better than first-line treatment sodium valproate, but there were no differences between sodium valproate, lamotrigine or eventrate in terms of treatment failure; HRs (95% CIs) for treatment failure for any reason for sodium valproate versus: lamotrigine 1.06 (0.81 to 1.37), eventrate 1.13 (0.89 to 1.42), gabapentin 1.13 (0.61 to 2.11), phenytoin 1.17 (0.80 to 1.73), oxcarbazepine 1.24 (0.72 to 2.14), topiramate 1.37 (1.06 to 1.77), carbamazepine 1.52 (1.18 to 1.96), phenobarbitone 2.13 (1.20 to 3.79), lacosamide 2.64 (1.14 to 6.09). Network meta-analysis also showed high-certainty evidence that for secondary remission outcomes, few notable differences were shown for either seizure type; for individuals with focal seizures, carbamazepine performed better than gabapentin (12-month remission) and sodium valproate (six-month remission). No differences between lamotrigine and any AED were shown for individuals with focal seizures, or between sodium valproate and other AEDs for individuals with generalised onset seizures. Network meta-analysis also showed high- to moderate-certainty evidence that, for 'time to first seizure,' in general, the earliest licensed treatments (phenytoin and phenobarbitone) performed better than the other treatments for individuals with focal seizures; phenobarbitone performed better than both first-line treatments carbamazepine and lamotrigine. There were no notable differences between the newer drugs (oxcarbazepine, topiramate, gabapentin, eventrate, zonisamide and lacosamide) for either seizure type. Generally, direct evidence (where available) and network meta-analysis estimates were numerically similar and consistent with confidence intervals of effect sizes overlapping. There was no important indication of inconsistency between direct and network meta-analysis results. The most commonly reported adverse events across all drugs were drowsiness/fatigue, headache or migraine, gastrointestinal disturbances, dizziness/faintness and rash or skin disorders; however, reporting of adverse events was highly variable across AEDs and across studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

High-certainty evidence demonstrates that for people with focal onset seizures, current first-line treatment options carbamazepine and lamotrigine, as well as newer drug eventrate, show the best profile in terms of treatment failure and seizure control as first-line treatments. For people with generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other seizure types), current first-line treatment sodium valproate has the best profile compared to all other treatments, but lamotrigine and eventrate would be the most suitable alternative first-line treatments, particularly for those for whom sodium valproate may not be an appropriate treatment option. Further evidence from randomised controlled trials recruiting individuals with generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other seizure types) is needed.

Carbamazepine Reduces Sharp Wave-Ripple Complexes and Exerts Synapse-Specific Inhibition of Neurotransmission in Ex Vivo Hippocampal Slices

Higher therapeutic concentrations of the antiseizure medication carbamazepine (CBZ) are associated with cognitive side effects. Hippocampal sharp wave-ripple complexes (SPW-Rs) are proposed to participate in memory consolidation during periods of quiet and slow-wave sleep. SPW-Rs are generated in the CA3 region and are regulated by multiple synaptic inputs. Here, we used a multi-electrode array to determine the effects of CBZ on SPW-Rs and synaptic transmission at multiple hippocampal synapses. Our results demonstrate that CBZ reduced SPW-Rs at therapeutically relevant concentrations (IC₅₀ = 37 μM) and altered the core characteristics of ripples, important for information processing and consolidation. Moreover, CBZ inhibited neurotransmission in a synapse-specific manner. CBZ inhibition was most potent at the medial-perforant-path-to-CA3 and mossy-fiber-to-CA3 synapses (IC₅₀s ~ 30 and 60 μM, respectively) and least potent at medial-perforant-path-to-dentate granule cell synapses (IC₅₀ ~ 120 μM). These results suggest that the synapse-specific CBZ inhibition of neurotransmission reduces SPW-Rs and that the CBZ inhibition of SPW-Rs may underlie the cognitive impairments observed with therapeutic doses of CBZ.

Neurocognitive Effects of Antiseizure Medications in Children and Adolescents with Epilepsy

Impairments in cognition are common in epilepsy and may be caused or exacerbated by antiseizure medications (ASMs). Positive effects on cognition may also be seen with some ASMs. Cognitive outcomes are of particular concern in children who may be at an increased risk of cognitive adverse effects of treatment. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed in order to evaluate the evidence for cognitive changes associated with treatment with ASMs in paediatric epilepsy patients. The ASMs considered were those in the current edition of the British National Formulary (BNF). For most ASMs, remarkably few studies providing robust data on cognitive effects in paediatric patients were identified. The available evidence suggests cognitive impairments may be associated with treatment with phenobarbital. Topiramate and phenytoin are also associated with negative effects on cognition, in particular word-finding difficulties and other language deficits with topiramate, but there are few data available specifically on children. Lamotrigine, levetiracetam and fenfluramine are associated with improvements in some cognitive domains, although it is unclear whether these effects are directly attributable to the medications or are a result of improvements in seizures. Neutral effects on cognition (no substantial evidence of worsening) were suggested for carbamazepine, everolimus, lacosamide, oxcarbazepine, perampanel and valproate. There is limited data for cannabidiol, clobazam, eslicarbazepine acetate, ethosuximide, rufinamide, vigabatrin and zonisamide, although the available evidence suggests these drugs are not associated with severe cognitive impairment. There was too little information to reach conclusions about the effects of brivaracetam, felbamate, gabapentin, pregabalin, retigabine, stiripentol or tiagabine.

The effects of anticholinergic medications on cognition in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Cognitive side effects of anticholinergic medications in older adults are well documented. Whether these poor cognitive outcomes are observed in children has not been systematically investigated. We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the associations between anticholinergic medication use and cognitive performance in children. Systematic review was conducted using Medline, PsychInfo, and Embase, identifying studies testing cognitive performance relative to the presence versus absence of anticholinergic medication(s) in children. We assessed effects overall, as well as relative to drug class, potency (low and high), cognitive domain, and duration of administration. The systematic search identified 46 articles suitable for meta-analysis. For the most part, random effects meta-analyses did not identify statistically significant associations between anticholinergic exposure and cognitive performance in children; the one exception was a small effect of anticholinergic anti-depressants being associated with better cognitive function (Hedges' g = 0.24, 95% CI 0.06-0.42, p = 0.01). Anticholinergic medications do not appear to be associated with poor cognitive outcomes in children, as they do in older adults. The discrepancy in findings with older adults may be due to shorter durations of exposure in children, differences in study design (predominantly experimental studies in children rather than predominantly epidemiological in older adults), biological ageing (e.g. blood brain barrier integrity), along with less residual confounding due to minimal polypharmacy and comorbidity in children.

Carbamazepine versus phenytoin monotherapy for epilepsy: an individual participant data review

BACKGROUND

This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2002 and last updated in 2017. This review is one in a series of Cochrane Reviews investigating pair-wise monotherapy comparisons.Epilepsy is a common neurological condition in which abnormal electrical discharges from the brain cause recurrent unprovoked seizures. It is believed that with effective drug treatment, up to 70% of individuals with active epilepsy have the potential to become seizure-free and go into long-term remission shortly after starting drug therapy with a single antiepileptic drug in monotherapy.Worldwide, carbamazepine and phenytoin are commonly-used broad spectrum antiepileptic drugs, suitable for most epileptic seizure types. Carbamazepine is a current first-line treatment for focal onset seizures in the USA and Europe. Phenytoin is no longer considered a first-line treatment, due to concerns over adverse events associated with its use, but the drug is still commonly used in low- to middle-income countries because of its low cost. No consistent differences in efficacy have been found between carbamazepine and phenytoin in individual trials; however, the confidence intervals generated by these trials are wide, and therefore, synthesising the data of the individual trials may show differences in efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

To review the time to treatment failure, remission and first seizure with carbamazepine compared with phenytoin when used as monotherapy in people with focal onset seizures (simple or complex focal and secondarily generalised), or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).

SEARCH METHODS

For the latest update, we searched the following databases on 13 August 2018: the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), which includes the Cochrane Epilepsy's Specialised Register and CENTRAL; MEDLINE; the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov); and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). We handsearched relevant journals and contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators, and experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing monotherapy with either carbamazepine or phenytoin in children or adults with focal onset seizures or generalised onset (tonic-clonic) seizures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual participant data (IPD) review. Our primary outcome was time to treatment failure. Our secondary outcomes were time to first seizure post-randomisation, time to six-month remission, time to 12-month remission, and incidence of adverse events. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models to obtain trial-specific estimates of hazard ratios (HRs), with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), using the generic inverse variance method to obtain the overall pooled HR and 95% CI.

MAIN RESULTS

IPD were available for 595 participants out of 1102 eligible individuals, from four out of 11 trials (i.e. 54% of the potential data). For remission outcomes, a HR greater than 1 indicates an advantage for phenytoin; and for first seizure and withdrawal outcomes, a HR greater than 1 indicates an advantage for carbamazepine. Most participants included in analysis (78%) were classified as experiencing focal onset seizures at baseline and only 22% were classified as experiencing generalised onset seizures; the results of this review are therefore mainly applicable to individuals with focal onset seizures.Results for the primary outcome of the review were: time to treatment failure for any reason related to treatment (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type for 546 participants: 0.94, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.26, moderate-certainty evidence); time to treatment failure due to lack of efficacy (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type for 546 participants: 0.99, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.41, moderate-certainty evidence); both showing no clear difference between the drugs and time to treatment failure due to adverse events (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type for 546 participants: 1.27, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.86, moderate-certainty evidence), showing that treatment failure due to adverse events may occur earlier on carbamazepine than phenytoin, but we cannot rule out a slight advantage to carbamazepine or no difference between the drugs.For our secondary outcomes (pooled HRs adjusted for seizure type), we did not find any clear differences between carbamazepine and phenytoin: time to first seizure post-randomisation (582 participants): 1.15, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.40, moderate-certainty evidence); time to 12-month remission (551 participants): 1.00, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.26, moderate-certainty evidence); and time to six-month remission (551 participants): 0.90, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.12, moderate-certainty evidence).For all outcomes, results for individuals with focal onset seizures were similar to overall results (moderate-certainty evidence), and results for the small subgroup of individuals with generalised onset seizures were imprecise, so we cannot rule out an advantage to either drug, or no difference between drugs (low-certainty evidence). There was also evidence that misclassification of seizure type may have confounded the results of this review, particularly for the outcome 'time to treatment failure'. Heterogeneity was present in analysis of 'time to first seizure' for individuals with generalised onset seizures, which could not be explained by subgroup analysis or sensitivity analyses.Limited information was available about adverse events in the trials and we could not compare the rates of adverse events between carbamazepine and phenytoin. Some adverse events reported on both drugs were abdominal pain, nausea, and vomiting, drowsiness, motor and cognitive disturbances, dysmorphic side effects (such as rash).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-certainty evidence provided by this systematic review does not show any differences between carbamazepine and phenytoin in terms of effectiveness (retention) or efficacy (seizure recurrence and seizure remission) for individuals with focal onset or generalised onset seizures.However, some of the trials contributing to the analyses had methodological inadequacies and inconsistencies, which may have had an impact on the results of this review. We therefore do not suggest that results of this review alone should form the basis of a treatment choice for a person with newly-onset seizures. We did not find any evidence to support or refute current treatment policies. We implore that future trials be designed to the highest quality possible, with consideration of masking, choice of population, classification of seizure type, duration of follow-up, choice of outcomes and analysis, and presentation of results.

Sodium valproate versus phenytoin monotherapy for epilepsy: an individual participant data review

BACKGROUND

Epilepsy is a common neurological condition in which abnormal electrical discharges from the brain cause recurrent unprovoked seizures. It is believed that with effective drug treatment up to 70% of individuals with active epilepsy have the potential to become seizure-free, and to go into long-term remission shortly after starting drug therapy with a single antiepileptic drug in monotherapy.Worldwide, sodium valproate and phenytoin are commonly used antiepileptic drugs for monotherapy treatment. It is generally believed that phenytoin is more effective for focal onset seizures, and that sodium pvalproate is more effective for generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types). This review is one in a series of Cochrane Reviews investigating pair-wise monotherapy comparisons. This is the latest updated version of the review first published in 2001, and updated in 2013 and 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To review the time to treatment failure, remission and first seizure of sodium valproate compared to phenytoin when used as monotherapy in people with focal onset seizures or generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group's Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform ICTRP on 19 February 2018. We handsearched relevant journals, contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators and experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing monotherapy with either sodium valproate or phenytoin in children or adults with focal onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: This was an individual participant data (IPD) review. Our primary outcome was time to treatment failure and our secondary outcomes were time to first seizure post-randomisation, time to six-month, and 12-month remission, and incidence of adverse events. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models to obtain trial-specific estimates of hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), using the generic inverse variance method to obtain the overall pooled HR and 95% CI.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 11 trials in this review and IPD were available for 669 individuals out of 1119 eligible individuals from five out of 11 trials, 60% of the potential data. Results apply to focal onset seizures (simple, complex and secondary generalised tonic-clonic seizures), and generalised tonic-clonic seizures, but not other generalised seizure types (absence or myoclonus seizure types). For remission outcomes, a HR of less than 1 indicates an advantage for phenytoin, and for first seizure and treatment failure outcomes a HR of less than 1 indicates an advantage for sodium valproate.The main overall results were: time to treatment failure for any reason related to treatment (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type 0.88, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.27; 5 studies; 528 participants; moderate-quality evidence), time to treatment failure due to adverse events (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type 0.77, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.37; 4 studies; 418 participants; moderate-quality evidence), time to treatment failure due to lack of efficacy (pooled HR for all participants 1.16 (95% CI 0.71 to 1.89; 5 studies; 451 participants; moderate-quality evidence). These results suggest that treatment failure for any reason related to treatment and treatment failure due to adverse events may occur earlier on phenytoin compared to sodium valproate, while treatment failure due to lack of efficacy may occur earlier on sodium valproate than phenytoin; however none of these results were statistically significant.Results for time to first seizure (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type 1.08, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.33; 5 studies; 639 participants; low-quality evidence) suggest that first seizure recurrence may occur slightly earlier on sodium valproate compared to phenytoin. There were no clear differences between drugs in terms of time to 12-month remission (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type 1.02, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.28; 4 studies; 514 participants; moderate-quality evidence) and time to six-month remission (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type 1.05, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.27; 5 studies; 639 participants; moderate-quality evidence).Limited information was available regarding adverse events in the trials and we could not make comparisons between the rates of adverse events on sodium valproate and phenytoin. Some adverse events reported with both drugs were drowsiness, rash, dizziness, nausea and gastrointestinal problems. Weight gain was also reported with sodium valproate and gingival hypertrophy/hyperplasia was reported on phenytoin.The methodological quality of the included trials was generally good, however four out of the five trials providing IPD for analysis were of an open-label design, therefore all results were at risk of detection bias. There was also evidence that misclassification of seizure type may have confounded the results of this review, particularly for the outcome 'time to first seizure' and heterogeneity was present in analysis of treatment failure outcomes which could not be explained by subgroup analysis by epilepsy type or by sensitivity analysis for misclassification of seizure type. Therefore, for treatment failure outcomes we judged the quality of the evidence to be moderate to low, for 'time to first seizure' we judged the quality of the evidence to be low, and for remission outcomes we judged the quality of the evidence to be moderate.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We have not found evidence that a significant difference exists between valproate and phenytoin for any of the outcomes examined in this review. However detection bias, classification bias and heterogeneity may have impacted on the results of this review. We did not find any outright evidence to support or refute current treatment policies. We recommend that future trials be designed to the highest quality possible with consideration of masking, choice of population, classification of seizure type, duration of follow-up, choice of outcomes and analysis, and presentation of results.

Carbamazepine adverse drug reactions

INTRODUCTION

Carbamazepine (CBZ) is used for the treatment of epilepsy and other neurological and psychiatric disorders. The occurrence of adverse reactions (ADRs) to CBZ can negatively impact the quality of life of patients, as well as increase health-care costs. Thus, knowledge of CBZ-induced ADRs is important to achieve safer treatment outcomes. Areas covered: This review describes the clinical features, known mechanisms, and clinical management of the main CBZ-induced ADRs. In addition, pharmacogenetic studies focused on ADRs induced by CBZ are cited. Expert commentary: CBZ-induced ADRs are well known in the literature. The metabolite CBZ-10,11-epoxide plays an important role in the mechanism that underlies the ADRs induced by CBZ. Several factors should be considered for a safer use of CBZ, such as monotherapy prescription when possible, an adequate dose titration, knowledge of previous ADRs in the patient, and routine monitoring of CBZ plasma concentrations in symptomatic patients. Pharmacogenetics is a potential tool for CBZ therapy improvement, and the design of multicenter studies focused on the identification of biomarkers for CBZ-induced ADRs could provide useful information for a safer CBZ therapy.

Long-term effects of adjunctive perampanel on cognition in adolescents with partial seizures

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate long-term effects of adjunctive perampanel on cognition, efficacy, growth, safety, and tolerability in adolescents with inadequately controlled partial seizures.

METHODS

Study 235, a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, Phase II study with an open-label extension phase (NCT01161524), was primarily designed to assess the effects of adjunctive perampanel on cognition. Patients (aged ≥12 to <18years) had a diagnosis of epilepsy with inadequately controlled partial seizures, with or without secondary generalization, despite receiving 1-3 antiepileptic drugs. During the double-blind phase, adjunctive perampanel or placebo was administered over a 6-week titration period and a 13-week maintenance period up to 12mg/day. During the extension phase, all patients received perampanel. Data from the extension phase are presented here. Study endpoints included change from baseline in Cognitive Drug Research (CDR) measures of cognition, seizure frequency, growth, development, the occurrence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and laboratory values.

RESULTS

A total of 114 patients entered the extension phase (prior double-blind treatment: placebo, n=41; perampanel, n=73). Perampanel had no effect on the CDR system global cognition score, continuity of attention, quality of episodic memory, quality of working memory, or speed of memory but was associated with a significant decline in power of attention at end of treatment compared with baseline (p=0.03). There were no effects on language skills or manual dexterity from baseline to end of treatment. At Weeks 40-52, median reduction in seizure frequency was 74.1%, and 50% responder rate was 66.0%. There were no clinically relevant effects of perampanel on growth or development at end of treatment compared with baseline. Overall, 84.2% of patients experienced at least one TEAE and 70.2% experienced at least one treatment-related TEAE. The most common TEAEs were dizziness (29.8%) and somnolence (19.3%). The TEAEs resulted in the discontinuation of treatment in 6.1% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In keeping with the 19-week double-blind phase, long-term adjunctive treatment with perampanel did not have any significant overall effects on the CDR system global cognition score in adolescent patients with inadequately controlled partial seizures. Similar trends were observed across the individual CDR system domains. Adjunctive perampanel showed sustained long-term seizure control and had a safety and tolerability profile similar to that observed in prior clinical studies.

Antiepileptic drug monotherapy for epilepsy: a network meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND

Epilepsy is a common neurological condition with a worldwide prevalence of around 1%. Approximately 60% to 70% of people with epilepsy will achieve a longer-term remission from seizures, and most achieve that remission shortly after starting antiepileptic drug treatment. Most people with epilepsy are treated with a single antiepileptic drug (monotherapy) and current guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom for adults and children recommend carbamazepine or lamotrigine as first-line treatment for partial onset seizures and sodium valproate for generalised onset seizures; however a range of other antiepileptic drug (AED) treatments are available, and evidence is needed regarding their comparative effectiveness in order to inform treatment choices.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the time to withdrawal of allocated treatment, remission and first seizure of 10 AEDs (carbamazepine, phenytoin, sodium valproate, phenobarbitone, oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, gabapentin, topiramate, levetiracetam, zonisamide) currently used as monotherapy in children and adults with partial onset seizures (simple partial, complex partial or secondary generalised) or generalised tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalised seizure types (absence, myoclonus).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases: Cochrane Epilepsy's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and SCOPUS, and two clinical trials registers. We handsearched relevant journals and contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators, and experts in the field. The date of the most recent search was 27 July 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of a monotherapy design in adults or children with partial onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual participant data (IPD) review and network meta-analysis. Our primary outcome was 'time to withdrawal of allocated treatment', and our secondary outcomes were 'time to achieve 12-month remission', 'time to achieve six-month remission', 'time to first seizure post-randomisation', and 'occurrence of adverse events'. We presented all time-to-event outcomes as Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We performed pairwise meta-analysis of head-to-head comparisons between drugs within trials to obtain 'direct' treatment effect estimates and we performed frequentist network meta-analysis to combine direct evidence with indirect evidence across the treatment network of 10 drugs. We investigated inconsistency between direct estimates and network meta-analysis via node splitting. Due to variability in methods and detail of reporting adverse events, we have not performed an analysis. We have provided a narrative summary of the most commonly reported adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

IPD was provided for at least one outcome of this review for 12,391 out of a total of 17,961 eligible participants (69% of total data) from 36 out of the 77 eligible trials (47% of total trials). We could not include IPD from the remaining 41 trials in analysis for a variety of reasons, such as being unable to contact an author or sponsor to request data, data being lost or no longer available, cost and resources required to prepare data being prohibitive, or local authority or country-specific restrictions.We were able to calculate direct treatment effect estimates for between half and two thirds of comparisons across the outcomes of the review, however for many of the comparisons, data were contributed by only a single trial or by a small number of participants, so confidence intervals of estimates were wide.Network meta-analysis showed that for the primary outcome 'Time to withdrawal of allocated treatment,' for individuals with partial seizures; levetiracetam performed (statistically) significantly better than current first-line treatment carbamazepine and other current first-line treatment lamotrigine performed better than all other treatments (aside from levetiracetam); carbamazepine performed significantly better than gabapentin and phenobarbitone (high-quality evidence). For individuals with generalised onset seizures, first-line treatment sodium valproate performed significantly better than carbamazepine, topiramate and phenobarbitone (moderate- to high-quality evidence). Furthermore, for both partial and generalised onset seizures, the earliest licenced treatment, phenobarbitone seems to perform worse than all other treatments (moderate- to high-quality evidence).Network meta-analysis also showed that for secondary outcomes 'Time to 12-month remission of seizures' and 'Time to six-month remission of seizures,' few notable differences were shown for either partial or generalised seizure types (moderate- to high-quality evidence). For secondary outcome 'Time to first seizure,' for individuals with partial seizures; phenobarbitone performed significantly better than both current first-line treatments carbamazepine and lamotrigine; carbamazepine performed significantly better than sodium valproate, gabapentin and lamotrigine. Phenytoin also performed significantly better than lamotrigine (high-quality evidence). In general, the earliest licenced treatments (phenytoin and phenobarbitone) performed better than the other treatments for both seizure types (moderate- to high-quality evidence).Generally, direct evidence and network meta-analysis estimates (direct plus indirect evidence) were numerically similar and consistent with confidence intervals of effect sizes overlapping.The most commonly reported adverse events across all drugs were drowsiness/fatigue, headache or migraine, gastrointestinal disturbances, dizziness/faintness and rash or skin disorders.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the high-quality evidence provided by this review supports current guidance (e.g. NICE) that carbamazepine and lamotrigine are suitable first-line treatments for individuals with partial onset seizures and also demonstrates that levetiracetam may be a suitable alternative. High-quality evidence from this review also supports the use of sodium valproate as the first-line treatment for individuals with generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types) and also demonstrates that lamotrigine and levetiracetam would be suitable alternatives to either of these first-line treatments, particularly for those of childbearing potential, for whom sodium valproate may not be an appropriate treatment option due to teratogenicity.

Cognitive and Behavioral Comorbidities: An Unwanted Effect of Antiepileptic Drugs in Children

Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological disorders and, despite optimally chosen and dosed antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), approximately 20%-30% of patients will continue to have seizures. Behavior and cognition are negatively impacted by seizures, but AEDs are also a major contributor to behavioral and cognitive deficits. However, the cognitive and behavioral effect of AEDs in children is insufficiently emphasized in the literature. This review summarizes the cognitive and behavioral effects of AEDs in the pediatric population with the objective of helping pediatricians and pediatric neurologists to select the AEDs with the best profile for their individual patient's needs.

A Systematic Appraisal of Neurosurgical Seizure Prophylaxis: Guidance for Critical Care Management

Clinical decisions are often made in the presence of some uncertainty. Health care should be based on a combination of scientific evidence, clinical experience, economics, patient value judgments, and preferences. Seizures are not uncommon following brain injury, surgical trauma, hemorrhage, altered brain metabolism, hypoxia, or ischemic events. The impact of seizures in the immediate aftermath of injury may be a prolonged intensive care stay or compounding of the primary injury. The aim of brain injury management is to limit the consequences of the secondary damage. The original intention of seizure prophylaxis was to limit the incidence of early-onset seizures. However, clinical trials have been equivocal on this point, and there is concern about the adverse effects of antiepileptic drug therapy. This review of the literature raises concerns regarding the arbitrary division of seizures into early onset (7 d) and late onset (8 d and beyond). In many cases it would appear that seizures present within 24 hours of the injury or after 7 days, which would be outside of the scope of current seizure prophylaxis guidance. There also does not appear to be a pathophysiological reason to divide brain injury-related seizures into these timeframes. Therefore, a solution to the conundrum is to reevaluate current practice. Prophylaxis could be offered to those receiving intensive care for the primary brain injury, where the impact of seizure would be detrimental to the management of the brain injury, or other clinical judgments where prophylaxis is prudent. Neurosurgical seizure management can then focus attention on which agent has the best adverse effect profile and the duration of therapy. The evidence seems to support levetiracetam as the most appropriate agent. Although previous reviews have identified an increase cost associated with the use of levetiracetam, current cost comparisons with phenytoin demonstrate a marginal price differential. The aim of this review is to assimilate the applicable literature regarding seizure prophylaxis. The final guidance is a forum upon which further clinical research could evaluate a new seizure prophylaxis paradigm.

Efficacy and Tolerability of Antiepileptic Drugs in Patients with Focal Epilepsy: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analyses

Several newer antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) have been introduced into clinical practice, offering choices for individualizing the treatment of epilepsy since AEDs have different efficacy and tolerability profiles. In particular, questions exist regarding which AEDs are the best options for the monotherapy of focal epilepsy. Is carbamazepine (CBZ), which is considered the standard treatment for focal epilepsy, still the best option for monotherapy of focal epilepsy, despite the emergence of new AEDs? In this systematic review, we compared the relative tolerability of all available AEDs for monotherapy of all types of epilepsy as well as their efficacy in the monotherapy of focal epilepsy. In addition, we compared CBZ with other AEDs for the monotherapy of focal epilepsy. We performed a search of the MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases for randomized controlled clinical trials. To compare the relative efficacy and tolerability of the AEDs, we performed network meta-analyses using a Bayesian random-effects model. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to determine the robustness of the results. A total of 65 studies were included in this review, composing 16,025 patients. Clobazam, levetiracetam, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, sulthiame, topiramate, and valproate had the best efficacy profiles and demonstrated no evidence of superiority or inferiority compared with CBZ. However, CBZ showed the greatest risk of patient discontinuation due to intolerable adverse reactions, whereas lamotrigine had the best safety profile and an 81% probability of being the best for the tolerability outcome of patient withdrawals from the study due to intolerable adverse reactions, followed by sulthiame (60%) and clobazam (51%). The newer AEDs-levetiracetam, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, sulthiame, and topiramate-should be considered for monotherapy of focal epilepsy because they were demonstrated to be as effective as the older ones (CBZ, clobazam, and valproate) for the treatment of focal epilepsy and were more tolerable. Lamotrigine was the AED with the best tolerability profile, suggesting that it may be the best option for the treatment of focal epilepsy in children and adults.

Antiepileptic drug monotherapy for epilepsy: a network meta-analysis of individual participant data

BACKGROUND

Epilepsy is a common neurological condition with a worldwide prevalence of around 1%. Approximately 60% to 70% of people with epilepsy will achieve a longer-term remission from seizures, and most achieve that remission shortly after starting antiepileptic drug treatment. Most people with epilepsy are treated with a single antiepileptic drug (monotherapy) and current guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom for adults and children recommend carbamazepine or lamotrigine as first-line treatment for partial onset seizures and sodium valproate for generalised onset seizures; however a range of other antiepileptic drug (AED) treatments are available, and evidence is needed regarding their comparative effectiveness in order to inform treatment choices.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the time to withdrawal of allocated treatment, remission and first seizure of 10 AEDs (carbamazepine, phenytoin, sodium valproate, phenobarbitone, oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, gabapentin, topiramate, levetiracetam, zonisamide) currently used as monotherapy in children and adults with partial onset seizures (simple partial, complex partial or secondary generalised) or generalised tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalised seizure types (absence, myoclonus).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases: Cochrane Epilepsy's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and SCOPUS, and two clinical trials registers. We handsearched relevant journals and contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators, and experts in the field. The date of the most recent search was 27 July 2016.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials of a monotherapy design in adults or children with partial onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual participant data (IPD) review and network meta-analysis. Our primary outcome was 'time to withdrawal of allocated treatment', and our secondary outcomes were 'time to achieve 12-month remission', 'time to achieve six-month remission', 'time to first seizure post-randomisation', and 'occurrence of adverse events'. We presented all time-to-event outcomes as Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We performed pairwise meta-analysis of head-to-head comparisons between drugs within trials to obtain 'direct' treatment effect estimates and we performed frequentist network meta-analysis to combine direct evidence with indirect evidence across the treatment network of 10 drugs. We investigated inconsistency between direct estimates and network meta-analysis via node splitting. Due to variability in methods and detail of reporting adverse events, we have not performed an analysis. We have provided a narrative summary of the most commonly reported adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

IPD was provided for at least one outcome of this review for 12,391 out of a total of 17,961 eligible participants (69% of total data) from 36 out of the 77 eligible trials (47% of total trials). We could not include IPD from the remaining 41 trials in analysis for a variety of reasons, such as being unable to contact an author or sponsor to request data, data being lost or no longer available, cost and resources required to prepare data being prohibitive, or local authority or country-specific restrictions.We were able to calculate direct treatment effect estimates for between half and two thirds of comparisons across the outcomes of the review, however for many of the comparisons, data were contributed by only a single trial or by a small number of participants, so confidence intervals of estimates were wide.Network meta-analysis showed that for the primary outcome 'Time to withdrawal of allocated treatment,' for individuals with partial seizures; levetiracetam performed (statistically) significantly better than both current first-line treatments carbamazepine and lamotrigine; lamotrigine performed better than all other treatments (aside from levetiracetam), and carbamazepine performed significantly better than gabapentin and phenobarbitone (high-quality evidence). For individuals with generalised onset seizures, first-line treatment sodium valproate performed significantly better than carbamazepine, topiramate and phenobarbitone (moderate- to high-quality evidence). Furthermore, for both partial and generalised onset seizures, the earliest licenced treatment, phenobarbitone seems to perform worse than all other treatments (moderate- to high-quality evidence).Network meta-analysis also showed that for secondary outcomes 'Time to 12-month remission of seizures' and 'Time to six-month remission of seizures,' few notable differences were shown for either partial or generalised seizure types (moderate- to high-quality evidence). For secondary outcome 'Time to first seizure,' for individuals with partial seizures; phenobarbitone performed significantly better than both current first-line treatments carbamazepine and lamotrigine; carbamazepine performed significantly better than sodium valproate, gabapentin and lamotrigine. Phenytoin also performed significantly better than lamotrigine (high-quality evidence). In general, the earliest licenced treatments (phenytoin and phenobarbitone) performed better than the other treatments for both seizure types (moderate- to high-quality evidence).Generally, direct evidence and network meta-analysis estimates (direct plus indirect evidence) were numerically similar and consistent with confidence intervals of effect sizes overlapping.The most commonly reported adverse events across all drugs were drowsiness/fatigue, headache or migraine, gastrointestinal disturbances, dizziness/faintness and rash or skin disorders.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the high-quality evidence provided by this review supports current guidance (e.g. NICE) that carbamazepine and lamotrigine are suitable first-line treatments for individuals with partial onset seizures and also demonstrates that levetiracetam may be a suitable alternative. High-quality evidence from this review also supports the use of sodium valproate as the first-line treatment for individuals with generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types) and also demonstrates that lamotrigine and levetiracetam would be suitable alternatives to either of these first-line treatments, particularly for those of childbearing potential, for whom sodium valproate may not be an appropriate treatment option due to teratogenicity.

Carbamazepine versus phenytoin monotherapy for epilepsy: an individual participant data review

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in Issue 2, 2002 and its subsequent updates in 2010 and 2015.Epilepsy is a common neurological condition in which recurrent, unprovoked seizures are caused by abnormal electrical discharges from the brain. It is believed that with effective drug treatment, up to 70% of individuals with active epilepsy have the potential to become seizure-free and go into long-term remission shortly after starting drug therapy with a single antiepileptic drug in monotherapy.Worldwide, carbamazepine and phenytoin are commonly-used broad spectrum antiepileptic drugs, suitable for most epileptic seizure types. Carbamazepine is a current first-line treatment for partial onset seizures in the USA and Europe. Phenytoin is no longer considered a first-line treatment due to concerns over adverse events associated with its use, but the drug is still commonly used in low- to middle-income countries because of its low cost. No consistent differences in efficacy have been found between carbamazepine and phenytoin in individual trials, although the confidence intervals generated by these studies are wide. Differences in efficacy may therefore be shown by synthesising the data of the individual trials.

OBJECTIVES

To review the time to withdrawal, six- and 12-month remission, and first seizure with carbamazepine compared to phenytoin, used as monotherapy in people with partial onset seizures (simple partial, complex partial, or secondarily generalised tonic-clonic seizures), or generalised tonic-clonic seizures, with or without other generalised seizure types.

SEARCH METHODS

For the latest update we searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group's Specialised Register (1st November 2016), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online (CRSO, 1st November 2016), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 1 November 2016), ClinicalTrials.gov (1 November 2016), and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP, 1st November 2016). Previously we also searched SCOPUS (1823 to 16th September 2014) as an alternative to Embase, but this is no longer necessary, because randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials in Embase are now included in CENTRAL. We handsearched relevant journals, contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators and experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in children or adults with partial onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures, comparing carbamazepine monotherapy versus phenytoin monotherapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This is an individual participant data (IPD) review. Our primary outcome was time to withdrawal of allocated treatment, and our secondary outcomes were time to six-month remission, time to 12-month remission, and time to first seizure post-randomisation. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models to obtain study-specific estimates of hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and the generic inverse variance method to obtain the overall pooled HR and 95% CI.

MAIN RESULTS

IPD were available for 595 participants out of 1192 eligible individuals, from four out of 12 trials (i.e. 50% of the potential data). For remission outcomes, HR greater than 1 indicates an advantage for phenytoin; and for first seizure and withdrawal outcomes, HR greater than 1 indicates an advantage for carbamazepine. The methodological quality of the four studies providing IPD was generally good and we rated it at low risk of bias overall in the analyses.The main overall results (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type) were time to withdrawal of allocated treatment: 1.04 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.39; three trials, 546 participants); time to 12-month remission: 1.01 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.31; three trials, 551 participants); time to six-month remission: 1.11 (95% CI 0.89 to 1.37; three trials, 551 participants); and time to first seizure: 0.85 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.04; four trials, 582 participants). The results suggest no overall statistically significant difference between the drugs for these outcomes. There is some evidence of an advantage for phenytoin for individuals with generalised onset seizures for our primary outcome (time to withdrawal of allocated treatment): pooled HR 0.42 (95% CI 0.18 to 0.96; two trials, 118 participants); and a statistical interaction between treatment effect and epilepsy type (partial versus generalised) for this outcome (P = 0.02). However, misclassification of seizure type for up to 48 individuals (32% of those with generalised epilepsy) may have confounded the results of this review. Despite concerns over side effects leading to the withdrawal of phenytoin as a first-line treatment in the USA and Europe, we found no evidence that phenytoin is more likely to be associated with serious side effects than carbamazepine; 26 individuals withdrew from 290 randomised (9%) to carbamazepine due to adverse effects, compared to 12 out of 299 (4%) randomised to phenytoin from four studies conducted in the USA and Europe (risk ratio (RR) 1.42, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.80, P = 0.014). We rated the quality of the evidence as low to moderate according to GRADE criteria, due to imprecision and potential misclassification of seizure type.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We have not found evidence for a statistically significant difference between carbamazepine and phenytoin for the efficacy outcomes examined in this review, but CIs are wide and we cannot exclude the possibility of important differences. There is no evidence in this review that phenytoin is more strongly associated with serious adverse events than carbamazepine. There is some evidence that people with generalised seizures may be less likely to withdraw early from phenytoin than from carbamazepine, but misclassification of seizure type may have impacted upon our results. We recommend caution when interpreting the results of this review, and do not recommend that our results alone should be used in choosing between carbamazepine and phenytoin. We recommend that future trials should be designed to the highest quality possible, with considerations of allocation concealment and masking, choice of population, choice of outcomes and analysis, and presentation of results.

Phenytoin versus valproate monotherapy for partial onset seizures and generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures: an individual participant data review

BACKGROUND

Worldwide, phenytoin and valproate are commonly used antiepileptic drugs. It is generally believed that phenytoin is more effective for partial onset seizures, and that valproate is more effective for generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types). This review is one in a series of Cochrane reviews investigating pair-wise monotherapy comparisons. This is the latest updated version of the review first published in 2001 and updated in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To review the time to withdrawal, remission and first seizure of phenytoin compared to valproate when used as monotherapy in people with partial onset seizures or generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group's Specialised Register (19 May 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; the Cochrane Library; 2015, Issue 4), MEDLINE (1946 to 19 May 2015), SCOPUS (19 February 2013), ClinicalTrials.gov (19 May 2015), and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform ICTRP (19 May 2015). We handsearched relevant journals, contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators and experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in children or adults with partial onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures with a comparison of valproate monotherapy versus phenytoin monotherapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual participant data (IPD) review. Outcomes were time to: (a) withdrawal of allocated treatment (retention time); (b) achieve 12-month remission (seizure-free period); (c) achieve six-month remission (seizure-free period); and (d) first seizure (post-randomisation). We used Cox proportional hazards regression models to obtain study-specific estimates of hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and the generic inverse variance method to obtain the overall pooled HR and 95% CI.

MAIN RESULTS

IPD were available for 669 individuals out of 1119 eligible individuals from five out of 11 trials, 60% of the potential data. Results apply to partial onset seizures (simple, complex and secondary generalised tonic-clonic seizures), and generalised tonic-clonic seizures, but not other generalised seizure types (absence or myoclonus seizure types). For remission outcomes: HR > 1 indicates an advantage for phenytoin; and for first seizure and withdrawal outcomes: HR > 1 indicates an advantage for valproate.The main overall results (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type) were time to: (a) withdrawal of allocated treatment 1.09 (95% CI 0.76 to 1.55); (b) achieve 12-month remission 0.98 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.23); (c) achieve six-month remission 0.95 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.15); and (d) first seizure 0.93 (95% CI 0.75 to 1.14). The results suggest no overall difference between the drugs for these outcomes. We did not find any statistical interaction between treatment and seizure type (partial versus generalised).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We have not found evidence that a significant difference exists between phenytoin and valproate for the outcomes examined in this review. However misclassification of seizure type may have confounded the results of this review. Results do not apply to absence or myoclonus seizure types. No outright evidence was found to support or refute current treatment policies.

Carbamazepine versus phenytoin monotherapy for epilepsy: an individual participant data review

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 2, 2002 and its subsequent update in 2010.Epilepsy is a common neurological condition in which recurrent, unprovoked seizures are caused by abnormal electrical discharges from the brain. It is believed that with effective drug treatment, up to 70% of individuals with active epilepsy have the potential to become seizure-free and go into long-term remission shortly after starting drug therapy with a single antiepileptic drug in monotherapy.Worldwide, carbamazepine and phenytoin are commonly used broad spectrum antiepileptic drugs, suitable for most epileptic seizure types. Carbamazepine is a current first line treatment for partial onset seizures in the USA and Europe. Phenytoin is no longer considered a first line treatment due to concerns over adverse events associated with its use, however the drug is still commonly used in low- to middle-income countries due to it's low cost. No consistent differences in efficacy have been found between carbamazepine and phenytoin in individual trials, however the confidence intervals generated by these studies are wide. Therefore, differences in efficacy may be shown by synthesising the data of the individual trials.

OBJECTIVES

To review the time to withdrawal, six- and 12-month remission, and first seizure of carbamazepine compared to phenytoin when used as monotherapy in people with partial onset seizures (simple partial, complex partial, or secondarily generalised tonic-clonic seizures) or generalised tonic-clonic seizures, with or without other generalised seizure types.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group's Specialised Register (16 September 2014), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 8), MEDLINE (1946 to 16 September 2014), SCOPUS (1823 to 16 September 2014), ClinicalTrials.gov (16 September 2014), and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform ICTRP (18 September 2014). We handsearched relevant journals, contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators and experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in children or adults with partial onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures with a comparison of carbamazepine monotherapy versus phenytoin monotherapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual participant data (IPD) review. Our primary outcome was time to withdrawal of allocated treatment, and our secondary outcomes were time to 12-month remission, time to six-month remission and time to first seizure post-randomisation. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models to obtain study-specific estimates of hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and the generic inverse variance method to obtain the overall pooled HR and 95% CI.

MAIN RESULTS

IPD were available for 595 participants out of 1192 eligible individuals, from four out of 12 trials (i.e. 50% of the potential data). For remission outcomes, HR > 1 indicates an advantage for phenytoin; and for first seizure and withdrawal outcomes, HR > 1 indicates an advantage for carbamazepine. Methodological quality of the four studies providing IPD was generally good and we rated it at low risk of bias overall in the analyses.The main overall results (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type) were time to withdrawal of allocated treatment: 1.04 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.39); time to 12-month remission: 1.01 (95% CI 0.78 to 1.31); time to six-month remission: 1.11 (95% CI 0.81 to 1.37); and time to first seizure: 0.85 (95% CI 0.70 to 1.04). The results suggest no overall statistically significant difference between the drugs for these outcomes. There is some evidence of an advantage for phenytoin for individuals with generalised onset seizures for our primary outcome (time to withdrawal of allocated treatment): pooled HR 0.42 (95% CI 0.18 to 0.96); and a statistical interaction between treatment effect and epilepsy type (partial versus generalised) for this outcome (P = 0.02), however misclassification of seizure type for up to 48 individuals (32% of those with generalised epilepsy) may have confounded the results of this review. Despite concerns over side effects leading to the withdrawal of phenytoin as first line treatment in the USA and Europe, we found no evidence that phenytoin is more likely to be associated with serious side effects than carbamazepine; 26 individuals withdrew from 290 randomised (9%) to carbamazepine due to adverse effects compared to 12 out of 299 (4%) randomised to phenytoin from four studies conducted in the USA and Europe (risk ratio (RR) 1.42, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.80, P = 0.014). We rated the quality of the evidence as low - moderate according to GRADE criteria, due to imprecision and potential misclassification of seizure type.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We have not found evidence that a statistically significant difference exists between carbamazepine and phenytoin for the efficacy outcomes examined in this review, however, CIs are wide and the possibility of important differences existing has not been excluded. There is no evidence in this review that phenytoin is more strongly associated with serious adverse events than carbamazepine. There is some evidence that participants with generalised seizures may be less likely to withdraw early from phenytoin than carbamazepine, but misclassification of seizure type may have impacted upon the results of this review. We recommend caution when interpreting the results of this review, and do not recommend that the results of this review alone should be used in choosing between carbamazepine and phenytoin. We recommend that future trials should be designed to the highest quality possible with considerations on allocation concealment and masking, choice of population, choice of outcomes and analysis, and presentation of results.

The Epileptic Encephalopathies of Infancy and Childhood

The epileptic encephalopathies comprise a group of devastating seizure syndromes which begin in infancy and early childhood and usually result in intractable epilepsy. While some syndromes are relatively easily diagnosed early in their course, others take time to evolve, hampering an early, confident diagnosis. Epileptic encephalopathies are associated with slowing of cognitive function and evolution of severe behavioral disorders, which are often more distressing to families than the epilepsy. While an underlying etiology may explain some of this co-morbidity, many children have no identifiable etiology found for their seizures. In these “idiopathic” cases, recurrent subtle seizures, frequent epileptiform discharge and non-convulsive status epilepticus probably all play a role in deterioration of cognitive function and evolution of behavior disorders. This paper will review the most common epileptic encephalopathy syndromes, discuss the cognitive and behavioral co-morbidities and review current therapeutic options.

Phenytoin versus valproate monotherapy for partial onset seizures and generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures

BACKGROUND

This is an updated version of the previously published Cochrane review (Issue 4, 2009)Worldwide, phenytoin and valproate are commonly used antiepileptic drugs. It is generally believed that phenytoin is more effective for partial onset seizures, and that valproate is more effective for generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalised seizure types.

OBJECTIVES

To review the best evidence comparing phenytoin and valproate when used as monotherapy in individuals with partial onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalised seizure types.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group's Specialised Register (19 February 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 1, The Cochrane Library, January 2013), MEDLINE (1946 to 18 February 2013), SCOPUS (19 February 2013), ClinicalTrials.gov (19 February 2013), and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform ICTRP (19 February 2013). We handsearched relevant journals, contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators and experts in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in children or adults with partial onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures with a comparison of valproate monotherapy versus phenytoin monotherapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual patient data review. Outcomes were time to (a) treatment withdrawal (b) 12-month remission (c) six-month remission and (d) first seizure post randomisation. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to obtain study-specific estimates of hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) with the generic inverse variance method used to obtain the overall pooled HR and 95% CI.

MAIN RESULTS

Individual patient data were available for 669 individuals out of 1119 eligible individuals from five out of 11 trials, 60% of the potential data. Results apply to generalised tonic-clonic seizures, but not absence or myoclonus seizure types. For remission outcomes, HR > 1 indicates an advantage for phenytoin and for first seizure and withdrawal outcomes HR > 1 indicates an advantage for valproateThe main overall results (pooled HR adjusted for seizure type, 95% CI) were time to (a) withdrawal of allocated treatment 1.09 (0.76 to 1.55); (b) 12-month remission 0.98 (0.78 to 1.23); (c) six-month remission 0.95 (0.78 to 1.15) and (d) first seizure 0.93 (0.75 to 1.14). The results suggest no overall difference between the drugs for these outcomes. No statistical interaction between treatment and seizure type (partial versus generalised) was found, but misclassification of seizure type may have confounded the results of this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We have not found evidence that a significant difference exists between phenytoin and valproate for the outcomes examined in this review. However misclassification of seizure type may have confounded the results of this review. Results do not apply to absence or myoclonus seizure types. No outright evidence was found to support or refute current treatment policies.

Associations between cognitive performance and cortisol reaction to the DEX/CRH test in patients recovered from depression

BACKGROUND

Hyperactivity of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis in major depression (MDD) is one of the most reliably reported neurobiological characteristics of affective disorders. Whether these alterations in HPA axis regulation are limited to the acute stage of MDD or whether they persist after recovery, remains ambiguous. A relationship between hypercortisolemia and cognitive dysfunction in acutely depressed patients has been repeatedly observed and it was also demonstrated in a number of studies that a discrete cognitive impairment often persists in the remitted state of depression. In the present study we were interested, whether these subtle impairments in cognitive functioning observed in patients recovered from depression compared to healthy control subjects are associated with HPA axis feedback sensitivity.

METHODS

In 20 recovered patients and 20 matched healthy controls we assessed HPA axis feedback sensitivity with the combined dexamethasone suppression/corticotropin-releasing-hormone (DEX/CRH) challenge test. Furthermore cognitive performance was investigated with respect to the following domains: verbal memory (Auditory Verbal Learning Test, VLMT), attention and executive control (Trail Making Test, TMT-A/B) as well as verbal fluency (Controlled Oral Word Association Test, COWAT).

RESULTS

Recovered patients showed a significantly poorer cognitive performance compared to healthy controls (all p<.05). With regard to HPA-axis activity, no overall difference was observed in the DEX/CRH test between recovered patients and controls. In recovered patients however, a significant association was observed between cortisol response and verbal memory (main effect VLMT trial 1-5: p=.046), attention (main effect TMT-A: p=.015) and executive functioning in terms of set shifting (interaction samples*TMT-B: p=.018). Poorer test performance was related to increased cortisol levels in response to challenge.

CONCLUSIONS

The present findings suggest that patients recovered from MDD are especially vulnerable toward detrimental effects of subtle HPA axis disturbances on cognitive performance.

Cognitive side-effects of antiepileptic drugs in children

Although the causes of cognitive impairment in patients with epilepsy have not been completely elucidated, three factors are clearly involved: the underlying etiology of epilepsy, the effects of seizures or the epileptiform EEG discharges themselves, and the central nervous system effects of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). All commonly used AEDs have some effect on cognitive function, and the effect may be substantial when crucial functions are involved, such as learning in children. With phenobarbital, there is a high risk for serious cognitive effects impacting attention and memory. Phenytoin may affect mental speed, mainly in higher dosing and polytherapy. Moderate monotherapy doses do not seem to induce much effect. Valproate does not seem to impair cognition if sufficiently controlled for hyperammonemia. For carbamazepine, there are conflicting reports, which may be due to selection bias or dosing. For oxcarbazepine, there is no evidence for any detrimental change compared to valproate but mild improvements on attentional tests. For topiramate, there is clear evidence for topiramate-induced cognitive impairment (attention, memory, and language function) in adults and children. Although data is sketchy, levetiracetam does not seem to have a negative impact on cognition. For lamotrigine, there is evidence of a cognitive-enhancing effect on attention. No evidence for cognitive side-effects has been found for vigabatrin. Ethosuximide is not associated with cognitive impairment although the evidence is sketchy. For gabapentin, tiagabine, zonisamide, and rufinamide no studies in children are available.

The cognitive impact of antiepileptic drugs

Effective treatment of epilepsy depends on medication compliance across a lifetime, and studies indicate that drug tolerability is a significant limiting factor in medication maintenance. Available antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) have the potential to exert detrimental effects on cognitive function and therefore compromise patient wellbeing. On the other hand, some agents may serve to enhance cognitive function. In this review paper, we highlight the range of effects on cognition linked to a variety of newer and older AEDs, encompassing key alterations in both specific executive abilities and broader neuropsychological functions. Importantly, the data reviewed suggest that the effects exerted by an AED could vary depending on both patient characteristics and drug-related variables. However, there are considerable difficulties in evaluating the available evidence. Many studies have failed to investigate the influence of patient and treatment variables on cognitive functioning. Other difficulties include variation across studies in relation to design, treatment group and assessment tools, poor reporting of methodology and poor specification of the cognitive abilities assessed. Focused and rigorous experimental designs including a range of cognitive measures assessing more precisely defined abilities are needed to fill the gaps in our knowledge and follow up reported patterns in the literature. Longitudinal studies are needed to improve our understanding of the influence of factors such as age, tolerance and the stability of cognitive effects. Future trials comparing the effects of commonly prescribed agents across patient subgroups will offer critical insight into the role of patient characteristics in determining the cognitive impact of particular AEDs.

Specific safety and tolerability considerations in the use of anticonvulsant medications in children

Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological disorders in the pediatric age range, and the majority of affected children can be safely and effectively treated with antiepileptic medication. While there are many antiepileptic agents on the market, specific drugs may be more efficacious for certain seizure types or electroclinical syndromes. Furthermore, certain adverse effects are more common with specific classes of medication. Additionally patient-specific factors, such as age, race, other medical conditions, or concurrent medication use may result in higher rates of side effects or altered efficacy. Significant developmental changes in gastric absorption, protein binding, hepatic metabolism, and renal clearance are seen over the pediatric age range, which impact pharmacokinetics. Such changes must be considered to determine optimal dosing and dosing intervals for children at specific ages. Furthermore, approximately one third of children require polytherapy for seizure control, and many more take concurrent medications for other conditions. In such children, drug–drug interactions must be considered to minimize adverse effects and improve efficacy. This review will address issues of antiepileptic drug efficacy, tolerability and ease of use, pharmacokinetics, and drug–drug interactions in the pediatric age range.

Antiepileptic drugs and neurodevelopment: an update

In utero exposure to some antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) is associated with an increased risk of impaired cognitive development. Specifically, valproate and polytherapy exposure are each associated with an increased risk of cognitive impairment in children compared with other antiepileptic medications. The data regarding the risk to neurocognitive development imposed by maternal use of other AEDs are conflicting or insufficient at this time to draw definitive conclusions. Behavioral dysfunction including autistic spectrum disorder is also associated with maternal use of AEDs during pregnancy. Whether treatment with AEDs during childhood permanently affects cognitive neurodevelopment is yet to be determined.

Impact of antiepileptic drugs on cognition, behavior, and motor skills in children with new-onset, idiopathic epilepsy

OBJECTIVE

As treatment options for epilepsy have increased, there has been a commensurate increase in interest in the side effect profiles of these drugs.

METHODS

In this study, children between the ages of 6 and 17 with a diagnosis of new-onset, idiopathic epilepsy were evaluated at baseline (n=57) and 6 (n=45) and 12 (n=31) months after initiation of antiepileptic drug therapy.

RESULTS

There was improvement in the cognitive functioning of children after 12 months of treatment. A transient drop in performance of children with generalized seizures (10 of 11 of whom had absence seizures) at 6 months may have been due to persistent seizures, the drugs used to treat them (predominantly ethosuximide), or both. Worsening of reaction time and reaction time variability in the focal seizure group, the only scores showing persistent deterioration over 12 months, may be attributable to the medications used for this group, the most common of which was carbamazepine.

CONCLUSIONS

There were few adverse effects of antiepileptic drug treatment in the group followed over 12 months. Carbamazepine may have been responsible for persistent impairment of reaction time and reaction time variability.

Antiepileptic drug-induced cognitive adverse effects: potential mechanisms and contributing factors

Cognitive dysfunction is frequently observed in patients with epilepsy and represents an important challenge in the management of patients with this disorder. In this respect, the relative contribution of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) is of relevance. The fact that a considerable number of patients require AED therapy for many years, or perhaps even a lifetime, emphasizes the need to focus on the long-term adverse effects of these drugs on cognition. The most prevalent of the CNS adverse effects observed during AED therapy are sedation, somnolence, distractibility, insomnia and dizziness. Sedation, in particular, is associated with most of the commonly used AED therapies. Nevertheless, cognitive function in individuals with epilepsy may also be influenced by several factors, of which AEDs constitute only one of many putative causes. In general terms, most studies agree that some differences exist among the older AEDs with regard to the effects on cognition, and some newer generation molecules may have a better cognitive profile than older AEDs. The mechanisms of action are an obvious determinant; however, there is still a lack of evidence for differentiation between available drugs with regard to cognitive effects. Some authors have suggested that there may be different cognitive effects associated with individual drugs; however, the question as to whether there are more specific deficits related to the action of individual drugs remains unsolved. There seems to be agreement that polytherapy and high-dose treatment can produce cognitive adverse effects and when high dosages or adjunctive polytherapy is needed, the balance between benefits and disadvantages may be negatively biased against drug treatment. Thus, drug treatment requires careful balancing in the attempt to reach maximal seizure control while avoiding neurotoxic adverse effects. Finally, the mood status of the patient and clinical relevance of the information obtained by neuropsychological testing represent important variables that need to be taken into account when discussing cognitive adverse effects of AEDs.

Thalamofrontal circuitry and executive dysfunction in recent-onset juvenile myoclonic epilepsy

PURPOSE

Thalamofrontal abnormalities have been identified in chronic primary generalized epilepsy, specifically in juvenile myoclonic epilepsy (JME). These regions also underlie executive functioning, although their relationship has yet to be examined in JME. This study examined the relationship between thalamic and frontal volumes and executive function in recent-onset JME compared to healthy control subjects and recent-onset benign childhood epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes (BCECTS), a syndrome not typically associated with thalamocortical or executive dysfunction.

METHODS

Twenty children with recent-onset JME were compared to 51 healthy controls and 12 children with BCECTS using quantitative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and measures of executive abilities. Quantitative thalamic and frontal volumes were obtained through semi-automated software. Subtests from the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS) and the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function (BRIEF) were used to measure executive function.

RESULTS

Executive functions were impaired in JME subjects compared to control and BCECTS subjects. Subjects with JME had significantly smaller thalamic volumes and more frontal cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) than control and BCECTS subjects. Thalamic and frontal volumes were significantly related to executive functioning in the JME group, but not in the other two groups.

DISCUSSION

Children with JME have significant executive dysfunction associated with significantly smaller thalami and more frontal CSF. Children with recent-onset BCECTS do not display the same pattern. Frontal and thalamic volumes appear to mediate the relationship between executive functioning and brain structure in JME.

Attention changes in epilepsy patients following 3-month topiramate or valproate treatment revealed by event-related potential

The present study was designed to reveal changes of cognitive processes in epilepsy (EP) patients with Topiramate (TPM) or Valproate (VPA) treatment using Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS-CR) and event-related potential (ERP). Thirty untreated epilepsy patients were randomly divided into two groups receiving TPM or VPA, respectively. Fifteen healthy volunteers were included as controls. All the patients were examined by WAIS-CR and ERP before and 3 months after drug treatment. Controls were examined by ERP at the time recruited into the study and 3 months later. Unfamiliar grey-scale photographs of faces (front view) were used as stimuli. ERP were recorded at the same time. Mean Intelligence Quotient (IQ) in TPM group decreased after the 3-month treatment (90.40 vs. 81.00, P<0.05). One component of ERP-P300 was smaller in epilepsy patients than controls (P<0.05), but remained unchanged after TPM or VPA treatment (P>0.05). A delayed and smaller N270 was detected in patients compared to controls (P<0.05). After 3 months TPM treatment, it decreased further compared to before treatment (P<0.05). N170 was lower in patient groups, and it became lower after TPM treatment than before. Our results demonstrate that in all epilepsy patients with mild cognitive impairment ERP changes were found. TPM affected the cognitive functions in epilepsy patients reflected by the decreased full-scale intelligence quotient (FIQ). The imperative effects of TPM on visual perception function reflected by N170 were more obvious than that of VPA. Attention reflected by N270 was impaired after TPM treatment.

Neurocognitive costs and benefits of psychotropic medications in older adults

Psychotropic medications are widely used in older adults and may cause neurocognitive deficits. Older adults are at increased risk of developing adverse effects because of age-related pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic changes. This article provides a comprehensive review of the undesirable, and at times beneficial, effects of psychotropic medications. The review covers a wide range of medications that impair executive function, memory, and attention, as well as a much smaller group of medications that lead to improved neurocognitive function. Some of the most commonly used psychotropic medications in older adults, namely, antidepressants, sedatives, and hypnotics, are among the drugs that most consistently lead to cognitive impairments. Medications with anticholinergic properties almost invariably lead to neurocognitive dysfunction, despite symptom improvement. The neurocognitive costs and benefits of psychiatric medications should be considered in the context of disease treatment in older adults.

The adverse effects of antiepileptic drugs in children

Efficacy of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are often equivalent, hence selection of an AED is often determined by the adverse effects (AEs). The development of neurocognitive AEs is almost inevitable with use of AEDs, especially in high-risk groups. Teratogenesis with major or minor malformations is of great concern during the first trimester of pregnancy, but an increasing body of information suggests that potential neurocognitive developmental delay may also occur with use of AEDs in the latter part of pregnancy. Decreased bone mineral density has been found in adults and children receiving both enzyme-inducing AEDs and valproate, an enzyme-inhibiting drug. AEDs may influence the lipid profile, body weight, reproductive, hormonal and other endocrine functions, and sleep architecture. There are age-specific AEs related to pharmacokinetic differences that have been highlighted in this review with emphasis on the pediatric population. A classification of AEs using different parameters is also included.

Valproate as a mainstay of therapy for pediatric epilepsy

This article reviews relevant pharmacologic and clinical information gathered for valproate since it was introduced into clinical practice 37 years ago and the application of this information for the treatment of childhood epilepsy. Valproate is available for oral and parenteral use. Oral forms are almost completely bioavailable but the rate of absorption varies between formulations. The Chrono tablet formulation has not been adapted for children aged <6 years, in whom the oral solution or syrup, requiring two or three daily administrations, has been used until recently. A new formulation specifically adapted for children, Chronosphere, administrated once or twice daily, is a modified-release formulation of valproate that minimizes fluctuations in serum drug concentrations during a dosage interval. Plasma protein binding is 80-94% and tends to decrease with increasing drug concentration. Valproate elimination is markedly decreased in newborns compared with older children and adults. Elimination by glucuronidation only becomes fully effective by the age of 3-4 years. In children aged 2-10 years receiving valproate, plasma clearances are 50% higher than those in adults. Over the age of 10 years, pharmacokinetic parameters approximate those of adults. Valproate can increase plasma concentrations of concomitant drugs, such as phenobarbital and lamotrigine, by inhibiting their metabolism. As a result of its broad spectrum of efficacy in a wide range of seizure types and epilepsy syndromes, valproate is a drug of choice for children with newly diagnosed epilepsy (focal or generalized), idiopathic generalized epilepsy, epilepsies with prominent myoclonic seizures or with multiple seizure types, and photosensitive epilepsies. In the group of cognitive epilepsies, in which severe spike and wave discharges are accompanied by cognitive deterioration, valproate, ethosuximide, or both should be tested before using corticosteroids. In comparative trials with carbamazepine, phenytoin, and phenobarbital in focal epilepsy and with ethosuximide in absence epilepsy, valproate was as effective and showed a favorable tolerability profile, with minimal adverse cognitive and CNS effects. The low potential for paradoxical seizure aggravation and the long-term efficacy of the drug are additional important factors that contribute to its excellent profile. Intravenous valproate may be effective for the treatment of convulsive and non-convulsive status epilepticus that is refractory to conventional drugs. In infants, potential benefits should be carefully weighed against the risk of liver toxicity. Gastrointestinal intolerance is a relatively frequent, dose-related adverse effect of the drug in children. Bodyweight increase and tremor may be observed in older children and adolescents. Despite the challenge of newer drugs, valproate remains a gold standard antiepileptic drug for the treatment of children.

Oxcarbazepine therapy in very young children: a single-center clinical experience

Oxcarbazepine is indicated for use as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy in the treatment of partial seizures in adults and children >or=4 years of age. The purpose of this retrospective chart review was to assess efficacy and tolerability of oxcarbazepine in children <or=4 years of age. A single-center retrospective chart review of patients <or=4 years old with epilepsy receiving oxcarbazepine between 2001 to 2004 was conducted. Twenty patients (male = 13, female = 7; ages 6-45 months [mean age 22.8 months]) who received oxcarbazepine were identified. Seizure types included partial onset (75%), symptomatic generalized (15%), and other (n = 2, 10%). Oxcarbazepine doses ranged between 14-71 mg/kg/day (mean dose: 36.5 mg/kg/day). Oxcarbazepine was prescribed as monotherapy in 15 patients and as first-line therapy in 73% patients. Overall, 70% experienced a significant reduction in seizures, and 50% became seizure-free while receiving oxcarbazepine. Transient drowsiness was reported in 20% of patients during dose escalation. No adverse events were observed in children <2 years old. The findings from this small series suggest that oxcarbazepine as monotherapy and adjunctive therapy may be effective and well tolerated in pediatric patients <or=4 years of age.

ILAE treatment guidelines: evidence-based analysis of antiepileptic drug efficacy and effectiveness as initial monotherapy for epileptic seizures and syndromes

PURPOSE

To assess which antiepileptic medications (AEDs) have the best evidence for long-term efficacy or effectiveness as initial monotherapy for patients with newly diagnosed or untreated epilepsy.

METHODS

A 10-member subcommission of the Commission on Therapeutic Strategies of The International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE), including adult and pediatric epileptologists, clinical pharmacologists, clinical trialists, and a statistician evaluated available evidence found through a structured literature review including MEDLINE, Current Contents and the Cochrane Library for all applicable articles from 1940 until July 2005. Articles dealing with different seizure types (for different age groups) and two epilepsy syndromes were assessed for quality of evidence (four classes) based on predefined criteria. Criteria for class I classification were a double-blind randomized controlled trial (RCT) design, >or=48-week treatment duration without forced exit criteria, information on >or=24-week seizure freedom data (efficacy) or >or=48-week retention data (effectiveness), demonstration of superiority or 80% power to detect a <or=20% relative difference in efficacy/effectiveness versus an adequate comparator, and appropriate statistical analysis. Class II studies met all class I criteria except for having either treatment duration of 24 to 47 weeks or, for noninferiority analysis, a power to only exclude a 21-30% relative difference. Class III studies included other randomized double-blind and open-label trials, and class IV included other forms of evidence (e.g., expert opinion, case reports). Quality of clinical trial evidence was used to determine the strength of the level of recommendation.

RESULTS

A total of 50 RCTs and seven meta-analyses contributed to the analysis. Only four RCTs had class I evidence, whereas two had class II evidence; the remainder were evaluated as class III evidence. Three seizure types had AEDs with level A or level B efficacy and effectiveness evidence as initial monotherapy: adults with partial-onset seizures (level A, carbamazepine and phenytoin; level B, valproic acid), children with partial-onset seizures (level A, oxcarbazepine; level B, None), and elderly adults with partial-onset seizures (level A, gabapentin and lamotrigine; level B, None). One adult seizure type [adults with generalized-onset tonic-clonic (GTC) seizures], two pediatric seizure types (GTC seizures and absence seizures), and two epilepsy syndromes (benign epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes and juvenile myoclonic epilepsy) had no AEDs with level A or level B efficacy and effectiveness evidence as initial monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

This evidence-based guideline focused on AED efficacy or effectiveness as initial monotherapy for patients with newly diagnosed or untreated epilepsy. The absence of rigorous comprehensive adverse effects data makes it impossible to develop an evidence-based guideline aimed at identifying the overall optimal recommended initial-monotherapy AED. There is an especially alarming lack of well-designed, properly conducted RCTs for patients with generalized seizures/epilepsies and for children in general. The majority of relevant existing RCTs have significant methodologic problems that limit their applicability to this guideline's clinically relevant main question. Multicenter, multinational efforts are needed to design, conduct and analyze future clinically relevant RCTs that can answer the many outstanding questions identified in this guideline. The ultimate choice of an AED for any individual patient with newly diagnosed or untreated epilepsy should include consideration of the strength of the efficacy and effectiveness evidence for each AED along with other variables such as the AED safety and tolerability profile, pharmacokinetic properties, formulations, and expense. When selecting a patient's AED, physicians and patients should consider all relevant variables and not just efficacy and effectiveness.

Single and combined effects of carbamazepine and vinpocetine on depolarization-induced changes in Na+, Ca2+ and glutamate release in hippocampal isolated nerve endings

The single and combined effects of carbamazepine and vinpocetine on the release of the excitatory amino acid neurotransmitter glutamate, on the rise in internal Na+ (Na(i), as determined with SBFI), and on the rise in internal Ca2+ (Ca(i), as determined with fura-2) induced by an increased permeability of presynaptic Na+ channels, with veratridine, or by an increased permeability of presynaptic Ca2+ channels with high K+, were investigated in isolated hippocampal nerve endings. The present study shows that carbamazepine and vinpocetine, both inhibit dose dependently the release of preloaded [3H]Glu induced by veratridine. However, carbamazepine is two orders of magnitude less potent than vinpocetine. The calculated IC(50)'s for carbamazepine and vinpocetine to inhibit veratridine-induced [3H]Glu release are 200 and 2 microM, respectively. Consistently 150 microM carbamazepine and 1.5 microM vinpocetine reduce the veratridine-induced rise in Na(i) in a similar extent. The single effects of carbamazepine and of vinpocetine on the presynaptic Na+ channel mediated responses, namely the rise in Na(i) and the release of Glu induced by veratridine, are additive. Responses that depend on the entrance of external Ca2+ via presynaptic Ca2+ channels, such as the release of [3H]Glu and the rise in Ca(i) induced by high K+, are insensitive to 300 microM carbamazepine and slightly reduced by 5 microM vinpocetine. It is concluded that the additive effects of carbamazepine, which is one of the most common antiepileptic drugs, and vinpocetine that besides its known neuroprotective action and antiepileptic potential is a memory enhancer, may perhaps be advantageous in the treatment of epileptic patients.

Cognitive side effects of anti-epileptic drugs

In recent years several new anti-epileptic drugs have been introduced, also for the treatment of childhood epilepsy. A major concern is their effect on learning and cognitive development. Testing the genuine effects on cognition of the anti-epileptic drugs is methodologically not easy. At this moment there are very few controlled trials that systematically examine the cognitive side effects of anti-epileptic drugs in childhood epilepsy. The available data indicate that the newer anti-epileptic drugs have a safe cognitive profile when prescribed correctly at the right dose and in monotherapy. Possible negative effects are mainly found for speed of processing and attention processes. As these processes are important instruments in every day learning and cognition, it is necessary to test these newer anti-epileptic drugs in well designed studies and in specific childhood epilepsy syndromes.

Epilepsy in children

10.5 million children worldwide are estimated to have active epilepsy. Over the past 15 years, syndrome-oriented clinical and EEG diagnosis, and better aetiological diagnosis, especially supported by neuroimaging, has helped to clarify the diversity of epilepsy in children, and has improved management. Perinatal and postinfective encephalopathy, cortical dysplasia, and hippocampal sclerosis account for the most severe symptomatic epilepsies. Ion channel defects can underlie both benign age-related disorders and severe epileptic encephalopathies with a progressive disturbance in cerebral function. However, the reasons for age-related expression in children are not understood. Neither are the mechanisms whereby an epileptic encephalopathy originates. Several new drugs have been recently introduced but have provided limited therapeutic benefits. However, treatment and quality of life have improved because the syndrome-specific efficacy profile of drugs is better known, and there is heightened awareness that compounds with severe cognitive side-effects and heavy polytherapies should be avoided. Epilepsy surgery is an important option for a few well-selected individuals, but should be considered with great caution when there is no apparent underlying brain lesion.

Cognitive side effects of antiepileptic drugs

Antiepileptic drugs produce global changes in the excitation levels in the central nervous system and often lead to cognitive and behavioral deficits. These deficits vary and must be considered independently in every patient. A number of consistent risk factors have been established. Polypharmacy and high blood levels of an antiepileptic drug (AED) increase the risk of cognitive side effects. Different effects have been demonstrated for some AEDs, but comparative data are incomplete across all of them. Other factors such as patient age and type/frequency of seizures may also be important contributors to the patient's cognitive state. AEDs can have positive or negative effects on mood, providing another consideration in choosing the course of treatment.

Epilepsy, antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and cognition

People with epilepsy are at increased risk of cognitive deficits as a result of various factors: the effect of seizures themselves, psychosocial factors and adverse effects of AEDs. It is crucial that, following early diagnosis of the correct epileptic syndrome, patients are treated with the appropriate drugs, as incorrect AEDs can exacerbate symptoms. By discussing various epileptic syndromes and performing a broad review of the available evidence, it is possible to make recommendations concerning prescription of AEDs with respect to cognition. An interesting advance in this area is the increasing use of AEDs such as valproate (in some countries divalproex is indicated), carbamazepine or lamotrigine (lamotrigine has been filed for approval in this indication) for bipolar disorders. Children and the elderly are especially vulnerable to adverse effects on cognition. This review highlights advantages of valproate in these populations; it is well tolerated and produces few cognitive side effects.

Attentional Ability in Children with Epilepsy

Attention problems are frequently seen in children with epilepsy. This review gives an overview of the most used constructs of attention and analyzes the available evidence for attention deficits in children with epilepsy, the effects of epilepsy variables on attention, and the possible pathophysiological mechanisms involved. Children with benign childhood epilepsy with centrotemporal spikes (BCECTS) have sustained attention difficulties. Right (R)-sided interictal epileptiform activity in these children interferes with R hemisphere function including sustained attention. Children with BCECTS also show selective and divided attention deficits if they have epileptiform discharges during sleep. Children with complex partial seizures (CPSs) have sustained attention deficits but no difficulties in selective or divided attention. Cognitive difficulties in children with epilepsy arise more frequently the earlier the onset of the epilepsy, and this could influence attentional ability development. Antiepileptic drug treatment is unlikely to impair attention, but phenobarbital has behavioral side effects similar to those in attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder. Concerning pathophysiology, evidence indicates that interictal epileptiform activity in children with BCECTS impairs sustained attention and that ongoing epileptiform discharges during sleep may impair attention. Further systematic studies of different aspects of attention in children with epilepsy are needed. Attention in children with drug-resistant epilepsy has not been addressed, and prospective studies before and after epilepsy surgery could be a useful model to study the influence of seizures on attentional ability.

Childhood epilepsy: what is the evidence for what we think and what we do?

This article reviews the strength of the evidence that underlies the current approach to the management of childhood epilepsy. The authors reviewed published, peer-reviewed English literature accessed through PubMed and Cochrane reviews with evidence rated as Class 1 (strongest) to Class 4 (weakest). There is considerable inaccuracy in the diagnosis of seizures and epilepsy syndromes. Sound information supports the consensus that the diagnosis of epilepsy should await two unprovoked seizures. Population-based studies indicate that remission from childhood onset epilepsy occurs in at least 50% of children. It is easier to predict a good seizure outcome than a poor one. Absence of concomitant neurologic handicap and onset before about 12 years of age are the most consistent predictors of remission. Intractability is poorly defined and difficult to predict until several antiepilepsy drugs have been used and failed to control the seizures. Most epilepsy syndrome diagnoses do not yield an accurate prognosis. Social outcome appears unsatisfactory in about 50% of cases without intellectual handicap. Death is rare in childhood epilepsy. Those without severe neurologic handicaps have the same mortality as the general population. We identified only 27 published randomized trials of antiepilepsy drugs in children that compare the efficacy of antiepilepsy drugs, offer treatment of syndromes currently without successful treatment, or have negative effects. There is a pressing need for better definitions of seizures and epilepsy syndromes. The causes of poor social outcome are unclear. Intractability needs a clear definition and randomized trials comparing treatment regimes are sadly lacking.

Some antiepileptic compounds impair learning by rats in a Morris water maze

In the present experiments, we investigated the effects of several commonly employed antiepileptic drugs on the performance of adult rats in a Morris water maze task. We found that phenytoin treatment produced the most deleterious performance impairments across all days of training, and that these performance deficits are not likely due to any general sensorimotor impairments. Carbamazepine had milder, but detectable negative effects, as carbamazepine-treated animals exhibited initial acquisition deficits, but rapidly achieved escape levels comparable to controls. In marked contrast, valproate and ethosuximide had no detectable effects on learning in the water maze. These results parallel previous findings in rats treated with these compounds and tested in an instrumental learning task, and are in general agreement with the human clinical literature. To the extent that one might wish to minimize learning deficits associated with maintenance on antiepileptic drugs, phenytoin is definitely not the treatment of choice, while valproate or ethosuximide are apparently much less disruptive.

Carbamazepine versus phenytoin monotherapy for epilepsy

BACKGROUND

Worldwide, carbamazepine and phenytoin are commonly used antiepileptic drugs. This review summarizes evidence from randomized controlled trials in which these two drugs have been compared.

OBJECTIVES

To review the best evidence comparing carbamazepine and phenytoin when used as monotherapy in subjects with partial onset seizures, or generalized onset tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalized seizure types.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched: (a) the trial register of the Cochrane Epilepsy Group; (b) The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2001); (c) MEDLINE 1966-2001. In addition we hand searched relevant journals and contacted the pharmaceutical industry and researchers in the field to seek any ongoing or unpublished studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials in children or adults with partial onset seizures or generalized onset tonic-clonic seizures. Trials must have included a comparison of carbamazepine monotherapy with phenytoin monotherapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual patient data review. Outcomes were time to (a) withdrawal of allocated treatment, (b) 12 month remission, (c) six month remission, and (d) first seizure post randomization. Data were analysed using a stratified logrank analysis with results expressed as hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), where a HR>1 indicates an event is more likely on phenytoin.

MAIN RESULTS

Individual patient data are available for 551 participants from three trials, representing 63% of the participants recruited into the nine trials that met our inclusion criteria. By convention, for the outcomes time to six and 12 month remission HR>1 indicates a clinical advantage for phenytoin, whilst for time to withdrawal and first seizure HR>1 indicates a clinical advantage for carbamazepine. Results (HR (95% CI)) were: (i) time to withdrawal of allocated treatment 0.97(0.74 to 1.28), (ii) time to 12 month remission 1.00(0.78 to 1.29), (iii) time to six month remission 1.10(0.87 to 1.39), (iv) time to first seizure 0.91(0.74 to 1.12). The results suggest no overall difference between carbamazepine and phenytoin for these outcomes.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

We have not found evidence that a significant difference exists between carbamazepine and phenytoin for the outcomes examined in this review. Confidence intervals are wide and the possibility of important differences existing has not been excluded.

Childhood epilepsy in relation to mental handicap and behavioural disorders

Epidemiological studies indicate that there is a high rate of mental retardation and behavioural problems in children with epilepsy. In some cases both the epilepsy and the mental retardation will have a common cause, such as a metabolic disorder or brain trauma. However, in other children, the epilepsy itself may cause either temporary or permanent learning problems. When permanent learning disability can be prevented it is important to treat the epilepsy early and effectively. Children with specific learning difficulties and memory problems can benefit greatly from appropriate management. There are many causes of behavioural disturbance in children with epilepsy. These causes include the epilepsy itself, treatment of the epilepsy, reactions to the epilepsy, associated brain damage/dysfunction and causes that are equally applicable to children who do not have epilepsy. Identifying the cause or causes in each child allows rational management to be provided. Antiepileptic treatment with medication or surgery can either improve the situation or make matters worse. The treatment should be tailored to the needs of the individual child. If surgery is required, there is a strong argument for performing this early in life, both to allow the greatest opportunity for brain plasticity and also to allow the child full benefit from the important developmental and educational years, without the problems that can be associated with the epilepsy. Skilled management of children with epilepsy who have mental retardation and/or behavioural problems can be very rewarding both for the family and for the professionals involved.

Comparison the cognitive effect of anti-epileptic drugs in seizure-free children with epilepsy before and after drug withdrawal

We studied the cognitive effects of antiepileptic drugs (AED), by investigating epileptic children who were seizure-free for at least 2 years and who had undergone fixed monotherapy. Seventy consecutive epileptic children (25 with carbamazepine (CBZ), 22 with phenobarbital (PB), and 23 with valproate (VPA)) were examined by Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised (WISC-R) and auditory event-related potentials (P(300)) at three sessions: before AED reduction, then 1 and 7 months after complete withdrawal of treatment. There were no significant differences in IQ and subtests scores of WISC-R in any group at any of the three sessions. P(300) latencies were significantly increased in the children receiving PB but not in children receiving CBZ or VPA. P(300) amplitudes were increased but not significantly different among the three groups. These findings suggest that PB may affect cognitive function on children, but the changes of P(300) latencies may improve after discontinuation.

Phenytoin versus valproate monotherapy for partial onset seizures and generalized onset tonic-clonic seizures

BACKGROUND

Phenytoin and valproate are commonly used antiepileptic drugs. It is generally believed that phenytoin is more effective for partial onset (simple partial, complex partial and secondary generalized tonic-clonic seizures) seizures whilst valproate is more effective in generalized onset seizures (generalized tonic-clonic seizures, absence, myoclonus) although there is no evidence from randomized controlled trials to support this belief. The use of individual patient data meta-analysis enabled us to examine time to event outcomes which are important in epilepsy monotherapy trials, and also to examine treatment-covariate interactions.

OBJECTIVES

To review the best evidence comparing phenytoin and valproate when used as monotherapy in subjects with partial onset seizures, or generalized onset tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalized seizure types.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Our search strategy included: (i) the Cochrane Epilepsy Group trial register, (ii) MEDLINE 1966-2000, (iii) hand-searching relevant journals, (iv) the pharmaceutical industry, and (v) researchers in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials in children or adults with partial onset seizures or generalized onset tonic-clonic seizures. Trials must have included a comparison of phenytoin monotherapy with valproate monotherapy.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

This was an individual patient data review. Outcomes were time to (i) withdrawal of allocated treatment, (ii) 12 month remission, (iii) six month remission, and (iv) first seizure post randomization. Data were analysed using stratified logrank analysis with results expressed as hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI), where a HR>1 indicates an event is more likely on phenytoin. A test for interaction between treatment and seizure type (partial onset versus generalized onset) was also undertaken for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

Data were available for 669 subjects from five trials, representing 60% of the subjects recruited into the eleven trials that met our inclusion criteria. One important limitation of these data is that in four of the five trials, for patients classified as having generalized onset seizures, tonic-clonic seizures were the only seizure types recorded at follow up, despite the fact that some patients will have been experiencing other generalized seizure types such as absence or myoclonus. Their results for the generalized seizures therefore relate only to generalized onset tonic-clonic seizures. The main overall results were as follows (HR(95% CI), HR>1 indicates a clinical advantage for phenytoin for both remission outcomes and a clinical advantage for valproate for the outcomes time to withdrawal and time to first seizure) (i) time to withdrawal of allocated treatment 1.10(0.79-1.54), (ii) time to 12 month remission 1.04(0.78-1.38), (iii) time to six month remission 0.89(0.71-1.11), and (iv) time to first seizure 0.92(0.74-1.14). The results suggest no overall difference between drugs for these outcomes. The test for an interaction between treatment and seizure type (generalized versus partial onset) was non significant for all outcomes.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

We have not found evidence that a significant difference exists between phenytoin and valproate for the outcomes examined in this review. As generalized seizures such as absence and myoclonus were counted in only one trial, results do not address the treatment of these seizure types. We found no unequivocal evidence to overthrow or support the policy of using valproate in generalized onset tonic-clonic seizures and phenytoin in partial onset seizures.

Absence of negative impact of levetiracetam on cognitive function and memory in normal and amygdala-kindled rats

The effect of the new antiepileptic drug (AED) levetiracetam (LEV, Keppra) on cognitive function was studied in normal and amygdala-kindled rats by using the Morris water maze test. In addition, we investigated the effect of LEV on long-term potentiation (LTP) in rat hippocampal slices. Sodium valproate (VPA) was used as comparator in all studies. Clonazepam (CZP) and carbamazepine (CBZ) were used in normal rats. The results indicated that doses of LEV known to suppress motor seizures did not alter cognitive performance. In contrast, similar doses of the classic AEDs all decreased learning performance of the rats. Likewise, VPA did alter LTP but LEV was inactive. Amygdala-kindled rats were more sensitive than normal rats to the effects of VPA. These results suggest that LEV may be devoid of negative impact on cognition in epileptic patients.