Variability of antiepileptic medication taking behaviour in sudden unexplained death in epilepsy: hair analysis at autopsy

Medication self-management in predominantly African American and Caribbean American people with epilepsy: The role of medication beliefs and epilepsy knowledge

INTRODUCTION

Suboptimal medication adherence is common in people with epilepsy (PWE) and disproportionally prevalent among racially/ethnically diverse patients. Understanding reasons and risks of suboptimal adherence is critical to developing interventions that reduce negative health outcomes. This cross-sectional study characterized common barriers to medication self-management, prevalence of negative medication beliefs, and gaps in epilepsy knowledge among predominantly African American and Caribbean American PWE and examined their interrelationships.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty-three PWE (Age = 42.1 ± 13.2; 60% female; 79% Black; 19% Hispanic/Latino) completed validated self-report questionnaires about medication self-management, medication beliefs, and epilepsy knowledge. Correlations and t-tests examined interrelationships.

RESULTS

Four barriers to medication self-management were common, including not taking antiseizure medications at the same time every day, forgetting doses, not planning refills before running out, and spreading out doses when running low. More than half the sample believed medications were overused by prescribers. Nearly one-third believed medications were harmful, and nearly a quarter believed their antiseizure medications were minimally necessary with almost half reporting elevated concerns about negative consequences of antiseizure medications. Poorer medication self-management was associated with stronger beliefs that medications in general are harmful/overused by prescribers. Individuals who were "accepting" of their antiseizure medications (i.e., high perceived necessity, low concerns) were less likely to spread out time between doses when running low compared to non-accepting counterparts. Knowledge gaps related to the cause of seizures/epilepsy, chronicity of epilepsy treatment, and seizure semiology/diagnosis were common. Nevertheless, epilepsy knowledge was unrelated to medication self-management and medication beliefs.

CONCLUSIONS

In these PWE, the most prevalent reasons for suboptimal medication self-management were behaviorally mediated and potentially modifiable. Negative medication beliefs and misconceptions about epilepsy and its treatment were common. Results further suggest that interventions addressing negative medication beliefs will be more effective than knowledge-based psychoeducation alone to improve medication self-management in this patient population.

The analysis of SUDEP forensic autopsies leading to preventable events

Introduction

The diagnosis of unexpected death by excluding non-natural causes, particularly in subjects with epilepsy, is a topic of interest and it is difficult to identify in the forensic field. Health professionals sometimes are faced with cases of sudden death, generally in young adults with a long history of epilepsy that require, for judicial purposes, an explanation in terms of cause and means to determine the death. SUDEP is an entity diagnosed by the exclusion of other causes that may have led to death, and then for forensic purposes, it requires particular attention and knowledge, and there is difficulty in identifying it. Our contribution aims to illustrate the scientific community pathological findings, medical history, and circumstantial evidence of four cases of sudden death in epileptic subjects.

Method

We illustrated four cases of judicial autopsies from the Institute of Forensic Medicine of Palermo, Italy; the purpose was to exclude the criminal intervention in determining the death as non-natural. The study of victims' medical history, the toxicological investigations, and the autopsy findings analyzed both from macroscopic and microscopic aspects have made it possible to highlight some findings that can be traced back to SUDEP despite the small sample of subjects studied.

Results

These presented findings of four SUDEP cases could help forensic pathologists in recognizing this entity, by highlighting its characteristics, and allowing for a pathological classification, also in relation to the use of drugs for epilepsy treatment and circumstances of death.

Discussion

To obtain a definite diagnosis of SUDEP, a complex investigation process is required in a multidisciplinary approach. Considering the literature review with criticism, it could allow health professionals to select the characteristics of epileptic patients at risk of sudden death. Processing human behaviors, molecular and histopathological findings of the autopsies, but also the physiological, and pathological human body system functions thanks to Artificial Intelligence, could be the key to explaining SUDEP mechanisms and the future results to prevent it.

Enhancing patients' experiences of living with epilepsy

Epilepsy is a multifaceted neurological condition that has many causes. Living with epilepsy can have significant physical, psychological and social effects on an individual and their family. A patient's experience of living with epilepsy can be influenced by multiple factors, such as pre-existing comorbidities or underlying risk factors for developing comorbidities. This article explores the experiences of patients with epilepsy at the point of diagnosis, in hospital and when taking anti-epileptic drugs. It also details various evidence-based interventions that can improve these patients' experiences and the quality of care that they receive.

Seizure Diaries and Forecasting With Wearables: Epilepsy Monitoring Outside the Clinic

It is a major challenge in clinical epilepsy to diagnose and treat a disease characterized by infrequent seizures based on patient or caregiver reports and limited duration clinical testing. The poor reliability of self-reported seizure diaries for many people with epilepsy is well-established, but these records remain necessary in clinical care and therapeutic studies. A number of wearable devices have emerged, which may be capable of detecting seizures, recording seizure data, and alerting caregivers. Developments in non-invasive wearable sensors to measure accelerometry, photoplethysmography (PPG), electrodermal activity (EDA), electromyography (EMG), and other signals outside of the traditional clinical environment may be able to identify seizure-related changes. Non-invasive scalp electroencephalography (EEG) and minimally invasive subscalp EEG may allow direct measurement of seizure activity. However, significant network and computational infrastructure is needed for continuous, secure transmission of data. The large volume of data acquired by these devices necessitates computer-assisted review and detection to reduce the burden on human reviewers. Furthermore, user acceptability of such devices must be a paramount consideration to ensure adherence with long-term device use. Such devices can identify tonic–clonic seizures, but identification of other seizure semiologies with non-EEG wearables is an ongoing challenge. Identification of electrographic seizures with subscalp EEG systems has recently been demonstrated over long (>6 month) durations, and this shows promise for accurate, objective seizure records. While the ability to detect and forecast seizures from ambulatory intracranial EEG is established, invasive devices may not be acceptable for many individuals with epilepsy. Recent studies show promising results for probabilistic forecasts of seizure risk from long-term wearable devices and electronic diaries of self-reported seizures. There may also be predictive value in individuals' symptoms, mood, and cognitive performance. However, seizure forecasting requires perpetual use of a device for monitoring, increasing the importance of the system's acceptability to users. Furthermore, long-term studies with concurrent EEG confirmation are lacking currently. This review describes the current evidence and challenges in the use of minimally and non-invasive devices for long-term epilepsy monitoring, the essential components in remote monitoring systems, and explores the feasibility to detect and forecast impending seizures via long-term use of these systems.

Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy: Risk factors, biomarkers, and prevention

Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) is one of the most important direct epilepsy-related causes of death, with an incidence in adults of 1.2 per 1000 person-years. Generalized tonic-clonic seizures have consistently emerged as the leading risk factor for SUDEP, particularly when such seizures are uncontrolled. High seizure burden, lack of antiepileptic drug (AED) treatment, polytherapy, intellectual disability, and prone position at the time of death are other key risk factors. Unfortunately, despite advances in treatment, overall mortality rates in epilepsy are rising. It is imperative that we learn more about SUDEP so that effective prevention strategies can be implemented. To help identify persons at greater risk of SUDEP and in need of closer monitoring, biomarkers are needed. Candidate biomarkers include electrocardiographic, electroencephalographic, and imaging abnormalities observed more frequently in those who have died suddenly and unexpectedly. As our knowledge of the pathophysiologic mechanisms behind SUDEP has increased, various preventative measures have been proposed. These include lattice pillows, postictal oxygen therapy, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and inhibitors of opiate and adenosine receptors. Unfortunately, no randomized clinical trials are available to definitively conclude these measures are effective. Rather, gaining the best control of seizures possible (with AEDs, devices, and resective surgery) still remains the intervention with the best evidence to reduce the risk of SUDEP. In this evidence-based review, we explore the incidence of SUDEP and review the risk factors, biomarkers, and latest prevention strategies.

Assessment of medication management capacity in a predominantly African American and Caribbean American sample of adults with intractable epilepsy

INTRODUCTION

Suboptimal or partial adherence to antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) is an avoidable cause of seizures and deleterious outcomes in epilepsy. As self-rated adherence may be unreliable, suboptimal adherence may go undetected. This study assessed generalizability of a performance-based measure of medication management to patients with intractable epilepsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Participants were 50 adults (age = 42 ± 14 years, 60% female, 82% Black, 20% Hispanic/Latino) with ≥2 seizures in the preceding 6 months. Antiepileptic drug adherence was electronically monitored for one month via Medication Event Monitoring Systems (MEMS) and self-rated (1 = very poor to 6 = excellent). The Medication Management Ability Assessment (MMAA) was administered at follow-up and scored by raters blind to adherence results. Spearman correlations and Poisson regressions assessed their associations.

RESULTS

On average, participants self-reported good-to-very good adherence. According to MEMS, participants took AEDs as prescribed 73% of the time; most participants (58%) missed ≥3 doses. The MMAA demonstrated strong internal consistency (Kuder-Richardson 20 = 0.81) and was associated with MEMS: percentage of days doses were taken correctly (r_s = 0.29, p = 0.04) and frequency of missed doses (r_s = -0.31, p = 0.03). The MMAA was not associated with self-rated adherence. Poisson regressions showed that self-ratings and MMAA performance accounted for unique variance in frequency of missed AED doses.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings provide evidence of the MMAA's criterion validity as a measure of capacity to manage AEDs. It may prove useful in cases where suboptimal adherence is suspected but unreported by patients. Its lack of significant association with self-rated adherence is consistent with prior reports; however, future studies should replicate these findings with larger samples.

Summary of the 2016 Partners Against Mortality in Epilepsy (PAME) Conference

Authors: Kevin D Graber, MD, Jeffrey Buchhalter, MD, PhD, Elson So, MD, Rainer Surges, MD, Detlev Boison, PhD, Franck Kalume, PhD, Cyndi Wright, Brian Gehlbach, MD, Jeff Noebels, MD, PhD, Vicky Whittemore, PhD, Elizabeth J. Donner, MD, MSc, Tom Stanton, MPP, Henry Smithson, MD, Jane Hanna, Masud Seyal, MD, PhD, Philippe Ryvlin, MD, PhD The third biannual Partners Against Mortality in Epilepsy (PAME) conference was held in Alexandria, VA from June 23-26, 2016. This was an intimate meeting of clinical and basic scientists, clinicians, people affected by Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy Patients (SUDEP) in a loved one, people living with epilepsy and patient advocate organizations. Plenary sessions have been summarized by moderators, including: 1) Mortality in people with epilepsy: epidemiology and surveillance. 2) Mortality in children. 3) What do we know about the factors that predispose certain people to die from a seizure? 4) What are the events that occur during and after a seizure that cause a death in SUDEP? 5) What are the options for prevention now and in the future? 6) Advocacy perspectives: how can we speed up awareness and prevention? 7) Updates and discussion on select programs in mortality research. Breakout sessions allowed for a more focused audience. Those summarized here are: Frequent non-SUDEP causes of mortality in people with epilepsy; Mechanisms of SUDEP; Lessons learned in grief and how to better support families; Future directions for research to impact prevention; and How do we improve SUDEP risk disclosure? While significant progress has been made with review of human mortality in epilepsy and study of animal models, this meeting emphasized the need for: better understandings of the epidemiology of SUDEP, advances in the understandings of mechanisms, continued search for biomarkers and preventative measures, patient education, increased awareness, continued advocacy for patient and family support and research funding.

Medication adherence in women with epilepsy who are planning pregnancy

OBJECTIVE

This study examines medication adherence among women with epilepsy via use of an electronic diary, as part of a prospective multicenter observational study designed to evaluate fertility in women with epilepsy (WWE) versus age-matched controls.

METHODS

WWE and healthy age-matched controls, seeking pregnancy, were given an iPod Touch using a customized mobile application (the WEPOD App) for daily data tracking. Eighty-six WWE tracked seizures and antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Tracking of nonepilepsy medications was optional. Diary data were counted from enrollment date until date of delivery, or up to 12 months if pregnancy was not achieved. Each day that subjects reported missing one or more AED was counted as nonadherence. Because adherence can only be determined in women who track consistently, we elected to include adherence data only for women who tracked >80% of days in the study.

RESULTS

Approximately 75% of WWE tracked >80% of days and were included in medication adherence data analysis. In this group, medication adherence rate was 97.71%; 44% of women admitted to missing an AED on at least 1 day. Among the subgroup of WWE who recorded nonepilepsy medications, AED adherence rate was 98.56%, versus 93.91% for non-AEDs.

SIGNIFICANCE

The 75% compliance rate with an electronic diary suggests that it may be useful to track medication adherence in future studies and in the clinical setting. In those who tracked, the observed medication adherence rate was considerably higher than the 75% adherence rate seen in previous epilepsy studies. This might be explained in part by selection bias, but may also result from properties of the diary itself (daily reminders, real time feedback given to the provider). Women reported a higher rate of adherence to AEDs than to other prescribed medications and supplements, suggesting that perceived importance of medications likely influences medication adherence, and warrants future study.

Salivary Monitoring of Antiepileptic Drugs

Therapeutic drug monitoring is widely used in the anticonvulsant treatment of persons with epilepsy. Most monitoring uses serum, but many anticonvulsant drugs can as easily be monitored using saliva, including phenobarbital, phenytoin, carbamazepine, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, topiramate, levetiracetam, and gabapentin. For highly protein-bound medications such as phenobarbital, phenytoin, and carbamazepine, saliva has the advantage of providing an approximation of the serum free level, the free level presumably being the active moiety. Salivary therapeutic drug monitoring offers a number of advantages over serum therapeutic drug monitoring, including lack of pain, lower cost, and wide potential acceptability by patients and physicians. It has the potential to open new approaches to treatment with strategic at-home monitoring at the time a seizure or adverse event occurs and to allow the collection of cohort-based, pharmacokinetic, and pharmcodynamic data for populations of persons of varying ages and with different medical conditions who require anticonvulsant medications.

Who to target in sudden unexpected death in epilepsy prevention and how? Risk factors, biomarkers, and intervention study designs

The risk of dying suddenly and unexpectedly is increased 24- to 28-fold among young people with epilepsy compared to the general population, but the incidence of sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) varies markedly depending on the epilepsy population. This article first reviews risk factors and biomarkers for SUDEP with the overall aim of enabling identification of epilepsy populations with different risk levels as a background for a discussion of possible intervention strategies. The by far most important clinical risk factor is frequency of generalized tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS), but nocturnal seizures, early age at onset, and long duration of epilepsy have been identified as additional risk factors. Lack of antiepileptic drug (AED) treatment or, in the context of clinical trials, adjunctive placebo versus active treatment is associated with increased risks. Despite considerable research, reliable electrophysiologic (electrocardiography [ECG] or electroencephalography [EEG]) biomarkers of SUDEP risk remain to be established. This is an important limitation for prevention strategies and intervention studies. There is a lack of biomarkers for SUDEP, and until validated biomarkers are found, the endpoint of interventions to prevent SUDEP must be SUDEP itself. These interventions, be they pharmacologic, seizure-detection devices, or nocturnal supervision, require large numbers. Possible methods for assessing prevention measures include public health community interventions, self-management, and more traditional (and much more expensive) randomized clinical trials.

Economic evaluation of a behavior-modifying intervention to enhance antiepileptic drug adherence

Between 35% and 50% of patients with epilepsy are reported to be not fully adherent to their medication schedule. We aimed to conduct an economic evaluation of strategies for improving adherence to antiepileptic drugs. Based on the findings of a systematic review, we identified an implementation intention intervention (specifying when, where, and how to act) which was tested in a trial that closely resembled current clinical management of patients with epilepsy and which measured adherence with an objective and least biased method. Using patient-level data, trial patients were matched with those recruited for the Standard and New Antiepileptic Drugs trial according to their clinical characteristics and adherence. Generalized linear models were used to adjust cost and utility in order to estimate the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained from the perspective of the National Health Service in the UK. The mean cost of the intervention group, £1340 (95% CI: £1132, £1688), was marginally lower than that of the control group representing standard care, £1352 (95% CI: £1132, £1727). Quality-adjusted life-year values in the intervention group were higher than those in the control group, i.e., 0.75 (95% CI: 0.70, 0.79) compared with 0.74 (95% CI: 0.68, 0.79), resulting in a cost saving of £12 (€15, US$19) and with the intervention being dominant. The probability that the intervention is cost-effective at a threshold of £20,000 per QALY is 94%. Our analysis lends support to the cost-effectiveness of a self-directed, implementation intention intervention for improving adherence to antiepileptic drugs. However, as with any modeling dependent on limited data on efficacy, there is considerable uncertainty surrounding the clinical effectiveness of the intervention which would require a substantive trial for a more definitive conclusion.

Investigation of Deaths in Seizure Patients

Epilepsy is commonly encountered in forensic pathology and is ultimately determined to be the cause of death in 1–2% of medicolegal death investigations. Epilepsy is a risk factor for death from external causes, including accidents and drowning. More commonly, deaths result from the underlying epilepsy pathology, including intracranial neoplasms, cerebrovascular disease, status epilepticus, and sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP). SUDEP refers to the sudden death in an epilepsy patient that lacks an alternative anatomic or toxicological cause of death. At autopsy, intracranial pathology is present in the majority of epilepsy-related deaths and is more likely to be identified following brain fixation. Common findings include brain tumors, mesial temporal sclerosis, and malformations of cortical development. Death investigators should pay particular attention to clinical history to establish a clear history of epilepsy and to determine seizure type, frequency, underlying etiology, and prior medical and surgical treatments as well as other comorbid medical conditions. A complete autopsy with toxicology is necessary to identify other causes of death, particularly in cases of suspected SUDEP. While toxicology may be helpful in some cases, caution must be taken in interpreting postmortem antiepileptic drug concentrations as levels decrease postmortem.

A community study in Cornwall UK of sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) in a 9-year population sample

PURPOSE

Epilepsy-related death, particularly sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP), is underestimated by healthcare professionals. One argument that physicians use to justify the failure to discuss SUDEP with patients and their families is that there is a lack of evidence for any protective interventions. However, there is growing evidence of potentially modifiable risk factors for SUDEP; although large-scale trials of interventions are still lacking. We determined the main risk factors associated with SUDEP in a comprehensive community sample of epilepsy deaths in Cornwall UK from 2004 to 2012.

METHODS

We systemically inspected 93 cases of all epilepsy and epilepsy associated deaths which occurred in Cornwall between 2004 and 2012 made available to us by the HM Cornwall coroner. These are the deaths where epilepsy was a primary or a secondary cause.

RESULTS

48 cases met the criteria for SUDEP and we elicited associated relevant risk factors. Many findings from our study are comparable to what has been reported previously. New points such as most of the population had increase in either or both seizure frequency/intensity within six months of death and majority did not have an epilepsy specialist review in the last one year to demise were noted.

CONCLUSION

This study is the first epidemiological study in England occurring in a whole population identifying systemically all deaths and the first large scale review in UK of SUDEP deaths since 2005. Being a community based study a key issue which was highlighted was that in the SUDEPs examined many might have been potentially preventable.

Development and validation of a single LC-MS/MS assay following SPE for simultaneous hair analysis of amphetamines, opiates, cocaine and metabolites

The two major challenges in hair analysis are the limited amount of samples usually available and the low targeted concentrations. To overcome these limitations, a liquid chromatography-electrospray-tandem mass spectrometry method (LC-ESI-MS/MS) allowing the simultaneous analysis of 17 amphetamines (amphetamine, BDB, m-CPP, dexfenfluramine, DOB, DOM, ephedrine, MBDB, MDA, MDEA, MDMA, methamphetamine, methylphenidate, 4-MTA, norephedrine, norfenfluramine and PMA), 5 opiates (morphine, codeine, heroin, ethylmorphine, and 6AM), cocaine and 5 metabolites [ecgonine methyl ester (EME), benzoylecgonine (BZE), anhydroecgonine methyl ester (AME), cocaethylene, and norcocaine] has been developed. The validation procedure included linearity, intra-day and inter-day variability and accuracy for 5 days (5 replicates at 3 concentration levels). Proficiency studies were used to check the accuracy of the method. As a result, all amphetamines, opiates and cocaine derivatives were satisfactory identified by 2 MRM transitions in 15 min. Calibration curves were performed by a quadratic 1/X weighted regression. The calibration model fits from 0.05 to 10 ng/mg. The limits of detection (LODs) range between 0.005 and 0.030 ng/mg. Precision has been checked by intra-day and inter-day RSD, and associated relative bias, which were lower than 25% for the limits of quantifications (LOQs) and lower than 20% for the other levels tested. This method was routinely applied to hair samples: two positive results of adult drug addicts are presented.

Long-term tolerability and safety of lamotrigine extended-release: pooled analysis of three clinical trials

BACKGROUND

In three randomized double-blind clinical trials, lamotrigine extended-release (lamotrigine XR) was demonstrated to be effective in the adjunctive treatment of intractable partial seizures or primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures and as monotherapy for partial seizures.

OBJECTIVE

A pooled analysis of the data from these three clinical trials was performed to determine whether the tolerability and safety profile of lamotrigine XR was similar to lamotrigine immediate-release (lamotrigine IR).

METHODS

This report describes results of a pooled analysis of the tolerability and safety data from the double-blind and open-label phases of these three trials. The number of patients in the integrated database exposed to one or more doses of lamotrigine XR was 662.

RESULTS

Duration of exposure to lamotrigine XR was ≥26 weeks in 82.5 % of patients and ≥52 weeks in 40.8 % of patients [mean (standard deviation) 39.8 (23.3) weeks]. The number of patients with one or more adverse events during double-blind or open-label treatment was 455 (69 %). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events, regardless of suspected cause, were headache (25 % of patients) and dizziness (16 % of patients). The number of patients with one or more adverse events considered to be reasonably attributed to lamotrigine XR during double-blind or open-label treatment was 202 (31 %). The most common adverse events considered to be reasonably attributed to lamotrigine XR were dizziness (10 % of patients) and headache (6 % of patients). Lamotrigine-attributed rash was reported in 4 % of patients and was the reason for premature withdrawal in 2 %. Adverse events leading to premature withdrawal were reported in 7 % of patients. The incidence of serious lamotrigine-attributed adverse events was 1 %. One case of serious rash was reported. No cases of rash were reported to be Stevens-Johnson syndrome or toxic epidermal necrolysis. Two deaths (acute cardiac failure and acute lamotrigine poisoning) were considered reasonably attributable to lamotrigine XR. No evidence of lamotrigine-attributed changes was observed in clinical laboratory data or vital signs.

CONCLUSION

The results show that lamotrigine XR is well tolerated with safety and tolerability profiles similar to those of lamotrigine IR. Given the similar safety, tolerability and efficacy profiles of lamotrigine XR and lamotrigine IR, the extended-release formulation may be preferable for many patients because of its ease of use (with once-daily dosing regardless of concomitant antiepileptic drug), the potential for enhanced compliance with once-daily dosing, and the provision of more stable serum drug concentrations. The benefit of once-daily dosing must be balanced with the potentially greater negative impact of a missed dose.

Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy. Potential role of antiepileptic drugs

Among people with epilepsy, there is a 20-fold higher risk of dying suddenly and unexpectedly compared with the general population. This phenomenon is called sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) and the term is used when sudden death occurs in an otherwise reasonably healthy person with epilepsy and the autopsy is unrevealing. In most cases, SUDEP occurs during sleep and is unwitnessed. Risk factors for SUDEP include the presence or number of generalized tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS), nocturnal seizures, young age at epilepsy onset, longer duration of epilepsy, dementia, absence of cerebrovascular disease, asthma, male gender, symptomatic aetiology of epilepsy and alcohol abuse. Suggested factors predisposing to SUDEP have included long-QT-related mutations, impaired serotonergic brain stem control of respiration, altered autonomic control and seizures with a pronounced postictal suppression and respiratory compromise. Final events that may lead up to SUDEP are a postictal CNS shutdown with pronounced EEG suppression, ictal or postictal apnoea, and ictal cardiac arrhythmia. It is unknown whether antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) modify the risk for SUDEP. Studies have consistently found that the presence or number of GTCS is associated with an increased risk for SUDEP. Since continued presence of GTCS clearly necessitates the use of AEDs, both factors must be taken into account to determine whether one or both increases the risk for SUDEP. Some studies suggest that AEDs, such as lamotrigine and carbamazepine, may increase the risk of SUDEP, but rarely adjust for GTCS. Other studies, which have found that AEDs are associated with a decreased SUDEP risk, either adjust for the number of GTCS or are meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials. Studies assessing the impact of AEDs on the risk for SUDEP are limited because SUDEP is a rare event, making randomized clinical trials impossible to conduct. Observational studies focus on whether or not an AED was prescribed. When postmortem AED concentrations are assessed they are usually low or absent, perhaps due to sampling in deceased individuals, making it difficult to fully resolve whether AEDs increase or decrease SUDEP risk. Despite these caveats, the evidence suggests that AEDs are not associated with an increased risk for SUDEP on a population level, although some individuals may be susceptible to effects of AEDs. Recent evidence from a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials of adjunctive AEDs at efficacious doses provides strong support for AED treatment as mono- or polytherapy to increase seizure control and protect against SUDEP in patients with refractory epilepsy. For patients for whom seizure control is unattainable, supervision or monitoring may prevent SUDEP, though this has never been formally tested.

Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy

Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) refers to the sudden death of a seemingly healthy individual with epilepsy, usually occurring during, or immediately after, a tonic-clonic seizure. The frequency of SUDEP varies depending on the severity of the epilepsy, but overall the risk of sudden death is more than 20 times higher than that in the general population. Several different mechanisms probably exist, and most research has focused on seizure-related respiratory depression, cardiac arrhythmia, cerebral depression, and autonomic dysfunction. Data from a pooled analysis of risk factors indicate that the higher the frequency of tonic-clonic seizures, the higher the risk of SUDEP; furthermore, risk of SUDEP is also elevated in male patients, patients with long-duration epilepsy, and those on antiepileptic polytherapy. SUDEP usually occurs when the seizures are not witnessed and often at night. In this Seminar, we provide advice to clinicians on ways to minimise the risk of SUDEP, information to pass on to patients, and medicolegal aspects of these deaths.

Forensic antiepileptic drug levels in autopsy cases of epilepsy

A 1-year retrospective coroner-based forensic examination of causes of death among persons with a history of epilepsy was conducted at the Allegheny County Coroner's Office to evaluate the phenomenon of sudden unexplained/unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP), a diagnosis of exclusion. All cases at the Coroner's Office from January 1, 2001 through December 31, 2001, were examined. Review of a total of 1200 autopsied deaths revealed 12 cases with a past medical history of seizure disorder on the death certificate, which listed seizure disorder as the immediate cause of death or contributory cause of the death. Of the 7 men with seizure disorders, 5 were categorized as definite SUDEP and 2 as possible SUDEP. Of the 5 women with seizure disorders, 2 were listed as definite SUDEP, 2 as possible, and 1 as non-SUDEP because the convulsive seizures developed from a grade II glial tumor. Postmortem findings were evaluated for 11 cases; 1 body was decomposed. Toxicological screens were carried out on blood, bile, urine, and eye fluid for all 12. Antiepileptic drug (AED) levels detected in postmortem toxicological analysis were examined. AED levels were determined in 7 cases. Four of 7 had subtherapeutic AED levels, 2 had therapeutic levels, and only 1 victim of SUDEP had levels above the therapeutic range. Five cases had no detectable AED levels. AED levels at autopsy were either absent or subtherapeutic in 9 of 10 SUDEP cases, findings consistent with the likelihood of poor AED compliance. Subtherapeutic levels of AEDs may be a risk factor for SUDEP that could contribute to increased interictal and/or ictal epileptiform activity with associated autonomic dysfunction leading to disturbance of heart rate, heart rhythm, and/or blood pressure.

Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy

Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) has an incidence ranging between 0.09 and 9 per 1000 patient-years depending on the patient population and the study methodology. It is the commonest cause of death directly attributable to epilepsy, and occurs at or around the time of a seizure. The principal risk factor for SUDEP is poorly controlled generalized tonic-clonic seizures. Other risk factors include polytherapy, male sex, early age at onset of epilepsy, symptomatic etiology, and, possibly, treatment with lamotrigine. The mechanisms underlying SUDEP are poorly understood, but autonomic dysfunction, central apnea, cerebral depression, and cardiac arrthymias have all been described in animal models of SUDEP and during human seizures. Prevention of this fatal event should be aimed at optimizing control of seizures, including prompt referral for consideration of epilepsy surgery. All patients should be told about the risks of SUDEP and informed that complete seizure control appears to be the one proven way of preventing the phenomenon.

Seizure induced cardiac asystole in epilepsy patients undergoing long term video-EEG monitoring

Ictal-related cardiac asystole is supposed to be a risk factor for sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP). We retrospectively analyzed the occurrence of ictal asystole in 2003 epilepsy patients undergoing long-term video EEG/ECG monitoring from 1/1999 to 6/2010 at the Freiburg epilepsy centre. Seven patients had cardiac arrest with a duration of at least 3s; 6 ictal, one postictal. In all patients, the temporal lobe was involved in ictal activity based on neurophysiological investigations or morphological lesion. Whereas asystole was self-limited in six cases, one patient with insular seizure origin had to undergo cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Interestingly, also patients with a short history of epilepsy, low seizure frequency and under treatment in monotherapy showed episodes of asystole. In all cases, even with brief cardiac arrest, asystole was associated with subsequent EEG flattening. In conclusion, ictal asystole is a rare event even in a population undergoing major changes in antiepileptic medication. Temporal lobe epilepsy was associated with a risk for asystole; cardiac arrest also occurred in patients who, based on their history, might have not been considered at elevated risk for SUDEP.

Adjunctive lamotrigine XR for primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures in a randomized, placebo-controlled study

Efficacy and tolerability of once-daily adjunctive lamotrigine extended-release (XR) for primary generalized tonic-clonic (PGTC) seizures in epilepsy were evaluated. Patients (n = 153) ≥ 13 years old diagnosed with epilepsy with PGTC seizures were randomized to once-daily adjunctive lamotrigine XR or placebo in a double-blind, parallel-group trial comprising a baseline phase, a 7-week double-blind escalation phase, and a 12-week double-blind maintenance phase. Lamotrigine XR was more effective than placebo with respect to median percentage reduction from baseline in weekly PGTC seizure frequency (primary endpoint-19-week treatment phase: 75.4% vs 32.1%, P<0.0001; escalation phase: 61.9% vs 30.6%, P = 0.0016; maintenance phase: 89.7% vs 33.3%, P<0.0001). Lamotrigine XR was more effective than placebo with respect to the percentage of patients with ≥50% reduction in PGTC seizure frequency. Significant separation from placebo for ≥50% reduction in PGTC seizures was observed beginning on treatment day 8. The most common adverse event was headache (lamotrigine XR 14%, placebo 16%).

Enhancing antiepileptic drug adherence: a randomized controlled trial

Suboptimal adherence to antiepileptic drug (AED) treatment is commonplace, and increases the risk of status epilepticus and sudden unexplained death in epilepsy. This randomized controlled trial was designed to demonstrate whether an implementation intention intervention involving the completion of a simple self-administered questionnaire linking the intention of taking medication with a particular time, place, and other activity can improve AED treatment schedule adherence. Of the 81 patients with epilepsy who were randomized, 69 completed a 1-month monitoring period with an objective measure of tablet taking (electronic registration of pill bottle openings, Medication Event Monitoring System [MEMS]). Intervention participants showed improved adherence relative to controls on all three outcomes: doses taken in total (93.4% vs. 79.1%), days on which correct dose was taken (88.7% vs. 65.3%), and doses taken on schedule (78.8% vs. 55.3%) (P<0.01). The implementation intention intervention may be an easy-to-administer and effective means of promoting AED adherence.

Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy: risk factors and potential pathomechanisms

Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) is the most common cause of death directly related to epilepsy, and most frequently occurs in people with chronic epilepsy. The main risk factors for SUDEP are associated with poorly controlled seizures, suggesting that most cases of SUDEP are seizure-related events. Dysregulation in cardiac and respiratory physiology, dysfunction in systemic and cerebral circulation physiology, and seizure-induced hormonal and metabolic changes might all contribute to SUDEP. Cardiac factors include bradyarrhythmias and asystole, as well as tachyarrhythmias and alterations to cardiac repolarization. Altered electrolytes and blood pH, as well as the release of catecholamines, modulate cardiac excitability and might facilitate arrhythmias. Respiratory symptoms are not uncommon during seizures and comprise central apnea or bradypnea, and, less frequently, obstruction of the airways and neurogenic pulmonary edema. Alterations to autonomic function, such as a reduction in heart rate variability or disturbed baroreflex sensitivity, can impair the body's capacity to cope with challenging situations of elevated stress, such as seizures. Here, we summarize data on the incidence of and risk factors for SUDEP, and consider the pathophysiological aspects of chronic epilepsy that might lead to sudden death. We suggest that SUDEP is caused by the fatal coexistence of several predisposing and triggering factors.

Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy: current knowledge and future directions

Although largely neglected in earlier literature, sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) is the most important epilepsy-related mode of death, and is the leading cause of death in people with chronic uncontrolled epilepsy. Research during the past two to three decades has shown that incidence varies substantially depending on the epilepsy population studied, ranging from 0.09 per 1000 patient-years in newly diagnosed patients to 9 per 1000 patient-years in candidates for epilepsy surgery. Risk profiles have been delineated in case-control studies. These and other studies indicate that SUDEP mainly occurs in the context of a generalised tonic-clonic seizure. However, it remains unclear why a seizure becomes fatal in a person that might have had many similar seizures in the past. Here, we review SUDEP rates, risk factors, triggers, and proposed mechanisms, and critically assess potential preventive strategies. Gaps in knowledge are discussed and ways forward are suggested.

Etiology and management of refractory epilepsies

The epilepsies are an important, common and diverse group of symptom complexes characterized by recurrent spontaneous seizures. Although many patients with epilepsy have their seizures controlled effectively by antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), about one-third of patients continue to have seizures, despite trying a range of AEDs. Such patients bear the heaviest burden of epilepsy, with increased morbidity and risk of premature mortality. Our current understanding of the refractory epilepsies--the most common of which are focal--is limited; even their definition is problematic. Standard treatments for refractory epilepsies include optimization of existing AED regimens, trials of further AEDs, and, for some patients, therapeutic resective neurosurgery. Recent basic research has explored possible underlying causes of refractory epilepsy, and two main hypotheses have emerged to account for the failure of AED treatment. According to one hypothesis, AEDs might fail because of alterations in the properties of their usual targets. Alternatively, they might fail because multidrug transporter mechanisms limit concentrations of the drugs at their targets. The refractory epilepsies can be viewed as offering remarkable insights into biological processes in the epilepsies, and their effective treatment remains an important aim; treatment would potentially bring much-needed relief to hundreds of thousands of patients across the world.

Mortality in epilepsy

All studies report an increased mortality risk for people with epilepsy compared with the general population. Population-based studies have demonstrated that the increased mortality is often related to the cause of the epilepsy. Common etiologies include neoplasia, cerebrovascular disease, and pneumonia. Deaths in selected cohorts, such as sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP), status epilepticus (SE), suicides, and accidents are more frequently epilepsy-related. SUDEP is a particular cause for concern in younger people, and whether and when SUDEP should be discussed with patients with epilepsy remain problematic issues. Risk factors for SUDEP include generalized tonic-clonic seizures, increased seizure frequency, concomitant learning disability, and antiepileptic drug polypharmacy. The overall incidence of SE may be increasing, although case fatality rates remain constant. Mortality is frequently secondary to acute symptomatic disorders. Poor compliance with treatment in patients with epilepsy accounts for a small proportion of deaths from SE. The incidence of suicide is increased, particularly for individuals with epilepsy and comorbid psychiatric conditions. Late mortality figures in patients undergoing epilepsy surgery vary and are likely to reflect differences in case selection. Future studies of mortality should be prospective and follow agreed guidelines to better quantify risk and causation in individual populations.

Risk factors in sudden death in epilepsy (SUDEP): the quest for mechanisms

People with epilepsy may die suddenly and unexpectedly without a structural pathological cause. Most SUDEP cases are likely to be related to seizures. SUDEP incidence varies and is <1:1,000 person-years among prevalent cases in the community and approximately 1:250 person years in specialist centres. Case-control studies identified certain risk factors, some potentially amenable to manipulation, including uncontrolled convulsive seizures and factors relating to treatment and supervision. Both respiratory and cardiac mechanisms are important. The apparent protective effect of lay supervision supports an important role for respiratory factors, in part amenable to intervention by simple measures. Whereas malignant tachyarrhythmias are rare during seizures, sinus bradycardia/arrest, although infrequent, is well documented. Both types of arrhythmias can have a genetic basis. This article reviews SUDEP and explores the potential of coexisting liability to cardiac arrhythmias as a contributory factor, while acknowledging that at present, bridging evidence between cardiac inherited gene determinants and SUDEP is lacking.