Iatrogenic Epileptogenicity Caused by CNS Drugs: A Short Case Series and Narrative Review.

Multiple medications are known to increase epileptogenicity in patients with and without an underlying seizure disorder. Paradoxically, some of these medications include anti-seizure medications (ASMs) and other medications, such as psychotropics, that act on the central nervous system (CNS). This article aims to discuss 3 clinical cases that highlight the gamut of epileptogenic reactivity secondary to CNS drugs ranging from increased epileptogenicity in the form of interictal epileptiform discharges (IEDs) without seizures, increased epileptogenicity on electroencephalogram (EEG) with associated non-epileptic movement disorders, and frank, de novo seizures. We also analyze the relevant literature on the impact of CNS medications on epileptogenicity.

Longitudinal Disability, Cognitive Impairment, and Mood Symptoms in Patients With Anti-NMDA Receptor Encephalitis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Longitudinal outcomes in anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis (anti-NMDARe) are still not fully understood and may not be adequately captured with the modified Rankin Scale (mRS), often the sole reported outcome. We aim to characterize longitudinal outcomes in anti-NMDARe using multiple outcome measures. METHODS: This single-center, retrospective, observational study examined outcome measures (mRS and Clinical Assessment Scale in Autoimmune Encephalitis [CASE]) in adults with NMDA receptor-IgG in CSF at short- and long-term follow-ups using linear and logistic regression modeling. Patients with evaluations for cognitive impairment (Montreal Cognitive Assessment/Mini-Mental State Examination), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire-9), and anxiety (General Anxiety Disorder-7) >6 months from symptom onset were correlated with final CASE scores. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients (76% female, median disease onset age = 28 years, range = 1-75 years) were included. The majority received first-line immunosuppressants (97%) at a median of 3.9 weeks (interquartile range [IQR] = 2.1-9.7) from symptom onset and 68% received second-line therapies. At baseline, median/mean mRS and CASE were 4 (IQR = 3-5) and 12.9 (SD = 7.2), respectively. At short-term follow-up (median = 10 weeks, IQR = 6-17), factors associated with higher CASE and mRS included dysautonomia, coma/lethargy, seizures/status epilepticus, and intensive care unit admission (p < 0.05). At long-term follow-up (median = 70 weeks, IQR = 51-174), median/mean mRS and CASE were 2 (IQR = 1-3) and 4.4 (SD = 4.2), respectively. Only weakness at symptom onset predicted higher mRS scores (odds ratio = 5.6, 95% confidence interval 1.02-30.9, p = 0.047). Despite both mRS and CASE improving from baseline (p < 0.001), only 9 patients (31%) returned to their premorbid function. Among patients with cognitive and mood evaluations >6 months from onset, moderate-severe cognitive impairment (42%), depression (28%), and anxiety (30%) were frequent. Cognitive and depression measures were associated with final CASE subscores (including memory, language, weakness, and psychiatric). DISCUSSION: Multiple clinical factors influenced short-term outcomes, but only onset weakness influenced long-term mRS, highlighting that mRS is predominantly affected by global motor function. Although mRS and CASE improved over time for most patients, these outcome measures did not capture the full extent of long-term functional impairment in terms of mood, cognition, and the ability to return to premorbid function. This emphasizes the need for increased utilization of more nuanced cognitive and mood outcome measures.

The benefits and risks of escalation versus early highly effective treatment in patients with multiple sclerosis.

INTRODUCTION: Multiple sclerosis is a chronic, demyelinating, inflammatory, and neurodegenerative disease of the central nervous system that affects over 2 million people worldwide. Considerable advances have been made in the availability of disease modifying therapies for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis since their introduction in the 1990s. This has led to debate regarding the optimal first-line treatment approach: a strategy of escalation versus early highly effective treatment. AREAS COVERED: This review defines the strategies of escalation and early highly effective treatment, outlines the pros and cons of each, and provides an analysis of both the current literature and expected future directions of the field. EXPERT OPINION: There is growing support for using early highly effective treatment as the initial therapeutic approach in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. However, much of this support stems from observational real-world studies that use historic data and lack safety outcomes or randomized control trials that compare individual high versus low-moderate efficacy therapies, instead of the approaches themselves. Randomized control trials (DELIVER-MS, TREAT-MS) are needed to systemically and prospectively compare contemporary escalation versus early highly effective treatment approaches.