Efficacy and safety of six new antiseizure medications for adjunctive treatment of focal epilepsy and epileptic syndrome: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of six new antiseizure medications (ASMs) for adjunctive treatment in adult patients with focal epilepsy and adolescents with Dravet syndrome (DS), Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS), or tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC). METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was performed using PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library databases from inception to October 13, 2023. We included published studies for a systematic review and a network meta-analysis (NMA). The efficacy and safety were reported in terms of a 50% response rate and dropout rate along with serious adverse events (SAEs). The outcomes were ranked with the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). RESULTS: Twenty eligible trials with 5516 patients and 21 interventions, including placebo, contributed to the analysis. Included ASMs were brivaracetam (BRV), cenobamate (CBM), cannabidiol (CBD), fenfluramine (FFM), everolimus (ELM), and soticlestat (SLT). The six new ASMs were compared in four different epilepsy subtypes. In focal epilepsy treatment, BRV seemed to be safe [vs placebo, risk ratio (RR) = 0.69, 95 % confidence interval (CI): 0.25-1.91] and effective (vs placebo, RR = 2.18, 95 % CI: 1.25-3.81). In treating focal epilepsy, CBM 300 mg was more effective at a 50 % response rate (SUCRA 91.8 %) compared with BRV and CBD. However, with the increase in dosage, more SAEs (SUCRA 85.6 %) appeared compared with other ASMs. CBD had good efficacy on LGS (SUCRA 88.4) and DS (SUCRA 66.2), but the effect on adult focal epilepsy was not better than that of placebo [vs placebo, RR = 0.83 (0.36-1.93)]. The NMA indicated that the likelihood of the most appropriate intervention (SUCRA 91.2 %) with minimum side effects（SUCRA 12.5 %）for the DS was FFM. Compared with CBD, high exposure to ELM demonstrated a more effective treatment of TSC (SUCRA 89.7 %). More high-quality SLT studies are needed to further evaluate the efficacy and safety. The comparison-adjusted funnel plots of annualized relapse rate and side effects in the included studies revealed no significant funnel plot asymmetry. CONCLUSIONS: This NMA indicated that the most effective treatment strategy for focal epilepsy, DS, Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, and TSC, respectively, included CBM 300 mg, FFM, CBD, and ELM. However, the aforementioned findings need further confirmation.

Anticonvulsive treatment in autoimmune encephalitis: a systematic literature review.

BACKGROUND: Epileptic seizures are a common manifestation of autoimmune encephalitis (AIE). Immunosuppression (IT) is an efficient therapeutic approach, particularly in AIE associated with antibodies against extracellular structures. The role of antiseizure medication (ASM) is less clear. However, it may be beneficial in disease refractory to IT or in chronic post-AIE epilepsy. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review assessing the PubMed and Cochrane databases to identify all reports on patients with epileptic seizures due to AIE in whom ASM was used and report it according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) standards. We included case series (minimum 3 eligible patients), retrospective and prospective observational studies, and randomized controlled trials. The main outcome assessed was therapeutic efficacy of ASM. Secondary outcomes comprise number, type, and adverse effects of ASM. Descriptive statistics were used. The level of evidence was assessed according to the Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. RESULTS: We screened a total of 3371 studies and included 30 (7 prospective, 23 retrospective). The reports cover a total of 708 patients, the majority (72.5%) suffering from AIE with antibodies against extracellular structures. Type of AIE, seizure frequency, and number and type of ASM used were heterogenous. While most patients profited from IT and/or ASM, the effect of ASM could rarely be isolated. Nine studies report on patients who received ASM monotherapy or were on ASM for a relevant length of time before IT initiation or after IT failure. One study reports a significant association between seizure freedom and use of sodium channel inhibitors. However, levels of evidence were generally low. CONCLUSION: Few robust data exist on the particular efficacy of ASM in autoimmune epileptic seizures. While these patients generally seem to respond less well to ASM or surgical interventions, sodium channel blockers may have an additional benefit compared to other substances. However, levels of evidence are low and early IT remains the mainstay of AIE therapy. Future trials should address optimal ASM selection and dosing in AIE.

Use of sulthiame as add-on therapy in children with non-self-limited focal epilepsies of childhood.

PURPOSE: This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of sulthiame (STM) as an add-on treatment in 49 patients with non-self-limited focal epilepsies of childhood (non-SeLFE) resistant to other antiseizure medications (ASM) and/or non-pharmacological treatment. METHODS: Patients with non-SeLFE who had failed to respond to at least five previous ASM, alone or in combination, were included in the study. All patients underwent neurological examination, brain magnetic resonance imaging repeated prolonged electroencephalography (EEG) or video-EEG studies, and neurometabolic studies. School achievements and/or performance on neuropsychological tests were also assessed. Sulthiame was added in doses ranging from 10 to 40 mg/kg/day. Efficacy was measured by comparing seizure frequency before and after initiating STM therapy. RESULTS: Twenty-nine of 49 patients (59.1%) who received STM as add-on therapy had a greater than 50% decrease in seizures after a mean follow-up of 35 months. One patient (2%) became seizure-free. Fourteen patients (40%) had a 25-50% seizure reduction. The mean time of response was 5 months (range, 3.5 to 6 months). No differences were found either between patients with a response of more or less than 50% or between the response of the focal seizure types (motor or non-motor, with or without consciousness impairment). CONCLUSION: In our study, STM was found to be effective and well-tolerated in children and adolescents with non-SeLFE. In the patients who responded, improvement in the EEG was seen.

Cannabidiol as an adjuvant treatment in adults with drug-resistant focal epilepsy.

Cannabidiol oil (CBD) has been approved as an anti-seizure medication for the treatment of uncommon types of epilepsy, occurring in children: Dravet syndrome, Lennox-Gastaut syndrome, and Tuberous Sclerosis Complex. There are few publications in relation to use the CBD in adult patients with focal drug-resistant epilepsy. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, safety, and quality of life, of adjuvant treatment with CBD, in adult patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy for at least 6 months. An open, observational, prospective cohort study was conducted using a before-after design (time series) in adult patients undergoing outpatient follow-up in a public hospital in Buenos Aires, Argentina. From a total of 44 patients, 5% of patients were seizure-free, 32% of patients reduced more than 80% of their seizures and 87% of patients reduced 50% of their monthly seizures. Eleven percent presented a decrease of less than 50% in seizure frequency. The average final dose was 335 mg/d orally administered. Thirty-four percent of patients reported mild adverse events and no patient reported severe adverse effects. At the end of the study, we found in most patients a significant improvement in the quality of life, in all the items evaluated. Adjuvant treatment with CBD in adult patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy was effective, safe, well tolerated, and associated with a significant improvement in their quality of life.

Immunomodulatory interventions for focal epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: This is an updated version of an original Cochrane Review published in 2013 (Walker 2013). Epilepsy is a common neurological disorder affecting 0.5% to 1% of the population. Pharmacological treatment remains the first choice to control epilepsy. However, up to 30% of people do not respond to drug treatment, and therefore do not achieve seizure remission. Experimental and clinical evidence supports a role for inflammatory pathway activation in the pathogenesis of epilepsy which, if effectively targeted by immunomodulatory interventions, highlights a potentially novel therapeutic strategy. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of immunomodulatory interventions on seizures, adverse effect profile, cognition, and quality of life, compared to placebo controls, when used as additional therapy for focal epilepsy in children and adults. SEARCH METHODS: For the latest update, we searched the following databases on 11 November 2021: Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and Medline (Ovid) 1946 to 10 November 2021. CRS Web includes randomised or quasi-randomised, controlled trials from PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialized Registers of Cochrane Review Groups including Epilepsy. We placed no language restrictions. We reviewed the bibliographies of retrieved studies to search for additional reports of relevant studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised placebo-controlled trials of add-on immunomodulatory drug interventions, in which an adequate method of concealment of randomisation was used. The studies were double-, single- or unblinded. Eligible participants were children (aged over 2 years) and adults with focal epilepsy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by the Cochrane Collaboration. We assessed the following outcomes. 1. 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency. 2. Seizure freedom. 3. Treatment withdrawal for any reason. 4. Quality of life. 5. ADVERSE EFFECTS: We used an intention-to-treat (ITT) population for all primary analyses, and we presented results as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% Cl). MAIN RESULTS: We included three randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials on a total of 172 participants. All trials included children and adults over two years of age with focal epilepsy. Treatment phases lasted six weeks and follow-up from six weeks to six months. One of the three included trials described an adequate method of concealment of randomisation, whilst the other two trials were rated as having an unclear risk of bias due to lack of reported information around study design. Effective blinding of studies was reported in all three trials. All analyses were by ITT. One trial was sponsored by the manufacturer of an immunomodulatory agent and therefore was at high risk of funding bias. Immunomodulatory interventions were significantly more effective than placebo in reducing seizure frequency (risk ratio (RR) 2.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15 to 4.60; 3 studies, 172 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). For treatment withdrawal, there was insufficient evidence to conclude that people were more likely to discontinue immunomodulatory intervention than placebo (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.28 to 3.80; 3 studies, 172 participants; low-certainty evidence). The RR for adverse effects was 1.16 (95% CI 0.84 to 1.59; 1 study, 66 participants; low-certainty evidence). Certain adverse effects such as dizziness, headache, fatigue, and gastrointestinal disorders were more often associated with immunomodulatory interventions. There were little to no data on cognitive effects and quality of life. No important heterogeneity between studies was found for any of the outcomes. We judged the overall certainty of evidence (using the GRADE approach) as low to moderate due to potential attrition bias resulting from missing outcome data and imprecise results with wide confidence intervals. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Immunomodulatory interventions as add-on treatment for children and adults with focal epilepsy appear to be effective in reducing seizure frequency. It is not possible to draw any conclusions about the tolerability of these agents in children and adults with epilepsy. Further randomised controlled trials are needed.

Perampanel add-on for drug-resistant focal epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: Epilepsy is one of the most common neurological disorders. Approximately 30% of people with epilepsy are considered to be drug-resistant, and usually need treatment with a combination of other antiepileptic drugs. Perampanel is a newer antiepileptic drug that has been investigated as add-on therapy for drug-resistant focal epilepsy. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of perampanel as add-on therapy for people with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. SEARCH METHODS: We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 20 October 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials comparing add-on perampanel with placebo. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcome was 1. 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency. Our secondary outcomes were 2. seizure freedom, 3. treatment withdrawal due to any reason, 4. treatment withdrawal due to adverse effects, and 5. ADVERSE EFFECTS: We used an intention-to-treat population for all primary analyses. We presented the results as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), except for individual adverse effects, which we reported with 99% CIs to compensate for multiple testing. We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence for each outcome. MAIN RESULTS: We included seven trials involving 2524 participants, all aged over 12 years. The trials were double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trials with treatment duration of 12 to 19 weeks. We assessed four trials at overall low risk of bias, and three trials at overall unclear risk of bias, due to risk of detection, reporting, and other biases. Compared with placebo, participants receiving perampanel were more likely to achieve a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.43 to 1.95; 7 trials, 2524 participants; high-certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, perampanel increased seizure freedom (RR 2.50, 95% CI 1.38 to 4.54; 5 trials, 2323 participants; low-certainty evidence) and treatment withdrawal (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.63; 7 trials, 2524 participants; low-certainty evidence). Participants treated with perampanel were more likely to withdraw from treatment due to adverse effects compared to those receiving placebo (RR 2.36, 95% CI 1.59 to 3.51; 7 trials, 2524 participants; low-certainty evidence). A higher proportion of participants receiving perampanel reported one or more adverse effects when compared to participants who received placebo (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.24; 7 trials, 2524 participants; high-certainty evidence). Compared with placebo, participants receiving perampanel were more likely to experience ataxia (RR 14.32, 99% CI 1.09 to 188.31; 2 trials, 1098 participants; low-certainty evidence), dizziness (RR 2.87, 99% CI 1.45 to 5.70; 7 trials, 2524 participants; low-certainty evidence), and somnolence (RR 1.76, 99% CI 1.02 to 3.04; 7 trials, 2524 participants). Subgroup analysis indicated that a larger proportion of participants who received perampanel at a dose of 4 mg/day (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.83; 2 trials, 710 participants), 8 mg/day (RR 1.83, 95% CI 1.51 to 2.22; 4 trials, 1227 participants), or 12 mg/day (RR 2.38, 95% CI 1.86 to 3.04; 3 trials, 869 participants) achieved a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency compared to placebo; however, treatment with perampanel 12 mg/day also increased treatment withdrawal (RR 1.77, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.40; 3 trials, 869 participants). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Add-on perampanel is effective at reducing seizure frequency and may be effective at maintaining seizure freedom for people with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Although perampanel was well-tolerated, there was a higher proportion of treatment withdrawals with perampanel compared with placebo. Subgroup analysis suggested that 8 mg/day and 12 mg/day are the most efficacious perampanel doses; however, the use of 12 mg/day would likely increase the number of treatment withdrawals. Future research should focus on investigating the efficacy and tolerability of perampanel with longer-term follow-up, as well as exploring an optimal dose.

Lamotrigine add-on therapy for drug-resistant focal epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: This is an updated version of a Cochrane Review last updated in 2020. Epilepsy is a common neurological disorder, affecting 0.5% to 1% of the population. In nearly 30% of cases, epilepsy is resistant to currently available drugs. Pharmacological treatment remains the first choice to control epilepsy. Lamotrigine is a second-generation antiseizure medication. When used as an add-on (in combination with other antiseizure medications), lamotrigine can reduce seizures, but with some adverse effects. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of add-on lamotrigine, compared with add-on placebo or no add-on treatment in people with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE (Ovid) on 3 October 2022 with no language restrictions. CRS Web includes randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialised Registers of Cochrane Review Groups, including Epilepsy. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated add-on lamotrigine versus add-on placebo or no add-on treatment in people of any age with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. We used data from the first period of eligible cross-over trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: For this update, two review authors independently selected trials and extracted data. Our primary outcome was 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency. Our secondary outcomes were treatment withdrawal, adverse effects, cognitive effects, and quality of life. Primary analyses were by intention-to-treat. We performed sensitivity best- and worse-case analyses to account for missing outcome data. We calculated pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% Cls) for dichotomous outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: We identified no new studies for this update, so the results and conclusions of the review are unchanged. We included five parallel-group studies in adults or children, eight cross-over studies in adults or children, and one parallel study with a responder-enriched design in infants. In total, these 14 studies enroled 1806 eligible participants (38 infants, 199 children, 1569 adults). Baseline phases ranged from four to 12 weeks and treatment phases ranged from eight to 36 weeks. We rated 11 studies (1243 participants) at low overall risk of bias and three (697 participants) at unclear overall risk of bias due to lack of information on study design. Four studies (563 participants) reported effective blinding. Lamotrigine compared with placebo probably increases the likelihood of achieving 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.45 to 2.23; 12 trials, 1322 participants (adults and children); moderate-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in risk of treatment withdrawal for any reason among people treated with lamotrigine versus people treated with placebo (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.37; 14 trials; 1806 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Lamotrigine compared with placebo is probably associated with a greater risk of ataxia (RR 3.34, 99% Cl 2.01 to 5.55; 12 trials; 1525 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), dizziness (RR 1.76, 99% Cl 1.28 to 2.43; 13 trials; 1768 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), nausea (RR 1.81, 99% CI 1.22 to 2.68; 12 studies, 1486 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and diplopia (RR 3.79, 99% Cl 2.15 to 6.68; 3 trials, 944 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There is probably little or no difference in the risk of fatigue between lamotrigine and placebo (RR 0.82, 99% CI 0.55 to 1.22; 12 studies, 1552 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Lamotrigine as an add-on treatment for drug-resistant focal seizures is probably effective for reducing seizure frequency. Certain adverse effects (ataxia, dizziness, diplopia, and nausea) are probably more likely to occur with lamotrigine compared with placebo. There is probably little or no difference in the number of people who withdraw from treatment with lamotrigine versus placebo. The trials were of relatively short duration and provided no long-term evidence. In addition, some trials had few participants. Further trials are needed to assess the long-term effects of lamotrigine and to compare lamotrigine with other add-on drugs.

Effectiveness and safety of perampanel as adjunctive therapy among Chinese patients with focal-onset epilepsy: A real-world prospective observational study.

OBJECTIVE: Perampanel (PER) has previously been shown to be effective and tolerable when used as an adjunctive therapy for patients with focal-onset seizures (FOS). This study aimed to evaluate the effect of PER as adjunctive therapy for patients with FOS in the Chinese population under real-world conditions for 1 year. METHODS: A prospective, single-center, 1-year observational study was conducted at Huashan Hospital, enrolling both under age (≥4 years old) and adult patients with FOS. Response to PER was assessed at 3-, 6-, and 12-month checkpoints by analyzing the 50 % responder rate, the seizure-free rate, and reduction in seizure frequency. RESULTS: One hundred and eight patients (mean age: 26.6 years, 56.5 % males) with FOS were included, with seventy-six patients finishing the 1-year follow-up (retention rate: 70.4 %, mean PER dose: 4.3 mg/day). The seizure frequency was reduced significantly at 3, 6, and 12 months relative to baseline (p < 0.001 for each seizure type). At 12 months, the responder rate was 65.8 %, and the seizure-free rate was 39.5 %. A significantly higher responder rate was found in patients with focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (p = 0.024), among which the percentage of patients with sleep-related epilepsy was significantly high (p = 0.045). Responders had a lower number of concomitant anti-seizure medications (ASMs) than the non-responders (p = 0.009). Drug-related adverse events (AEs) were reported in 37 % of patients, mostly mild or moderate, and the patients who experienced AEs had a higher daily dose of PER than those who did not (p = 0.026). CONCLUSION: Perampanel, an add-on therapy for focal-onset seizures, was found to be effective and tolerable in Chinese patients at 12 months.

Retention of brivaracetam in adults with drug-resistant epilepsy at a single tertiary care center.

INTRODUCTION: Brivaracetam (BRV) is licensed as an adjunctive treatment for focal epilepsy. We describe our clinical experience with BRV at a large UK tertiary center. METHODS: Adults initiated on BRV between July 2015 and July 2020 were followed up until they discontinued BRV or September 2021. Data on epilepsy syndrome, duration, seizure types, concomitant and previous antiseizure medication (ASM) use, BRV dosing, efficacy, and side effects were recorded. Efficacy was categorized as temporary (minimum three months) or ongoing (at last follow-up) seizure freedom, ≥50% seizure reduction, or other benefits (e.g., no convulsions or daytime seizures). Brivaracetam retention was estimated using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. RESULTS: Two-hundred people were treated with BRV, of whom 81% had focal epilepsy. The mean (interquartile range [IQR]) follow-up time was 707 (688) days, and the dose range was 50-600 mg daily. The mean (IQR) of the previous number of used ASMs was 6.9 (6.0), and concomitant use was 2.2 (1.0). One-hundred and eighty-eight people (94%) had previously discontinued levetiracetam (LEV), mainly due to side effects. 13/200 (6.5%) were seizure free for a minimum of six months during treatment, and 46/200 (23%) had a ≥50% reduction in seizure frequency for six months or more. Retention rates were 83% at six months, 71% at 12 months, and 57% at 36 months. Brivaracetam was mostly discontinued due to side effects (38/75, 51%) or lack of efficacy (28/75, 37%). Concomitant use of carbamazepine significantly increased the hazard ratio of discontinuing BRV due to side effects (p = 0.006). The most commonly reported side effects were low mood (20.5%), fatigue (18%) and aggressive behavior (8.5%). These side effects were less prevalent than when the same individuals took LEV (low mood, 59%; aggressive behavior, 43%). Intellectual disability was a risk factor for behavioral side effects (p = 0.004), and a pre-existing mood disorder significantly increased the likelihood of further episodes of low mood (p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Brivaracetam was effective at a broad range of doses in managing drug-resistant epilepsy across various phenotypes, but less effective than LEV in those who switched due to poor tolerability on LEV. There were no new tolerability issues, but 77% of the individuals experiencing side effects on BRV also experienced similar side effects on LEV.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Lacosamide and Oxcarbazepine for Seizure Control in Children with Newly Diagnosed Solitary Neurocysticercosis.

BACKGROUND: In newly diagnosed neurocysticercosis (NCC) with seizures, the choice of anti-seizure medication (ASM) seems to be arbitrary due to a lack of comparative studies. Although oxcarbazepine (OXC) is often considered efficacious for focal seizures in NCC, due to adverse effects, newer ASMs like levetiracetam (LCM) and lacosamide are also being explored. METHODS: This study was performed by case record review of children with newly diagnosed solitary viable parenchymal NCC aged 4-18years who received lacosamide and OXC at least for 12 weeks between August 2019 and April 2021, from a prospective registry of a tertiary care teaching hospital in north India. Seizure control, electroencephalographic abnormalities, resolution of inflammatory granulomas and adverse effects were compared between two arms at 12 and 24 weeks. RESULTS: Total 31 (8.3 ± 4.7 years, 19 boys) and 72 (8.6 ± 4.2 years, 43 boys) completed at least 12 weeks follow-up in LCM and OXC groups, out of which 2 and 51 completed at least 24 weeks follow-up in LCM and OXC groups, respectively. The occurrence of breakthrough seizure was comparable in both arms at 12 and 24 weeks (1/31 and 2/22 in lacosamide group vs. 2/72 and 4/51 in OXC group, p = 0.66 and 0.59, respectively). Patients receiving OXC had more frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (p = 0.0001) and four patients required discontinuation due to severe adverse events (SAEs), while none in the lacosamide group had SAEs. CONCLUSIONS: Lacosamide appears to be efficacious and safe for achieving seizure freedom in patients with solitary viable parenchymal neurocysticercosis.

The effect of fluoxetine on penicillin-induced epileptiform activity.

AIM: Depression is the most frequent psychiatric comorbidity in patients with epilepsy. Fluoxetine is the most widely used selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) in depression. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the dose-dependent effect of fluoxetine on penicillin-induced seizure by electrocorticogram (ECoG), a model for simple partial epilepsy. METHOD: The epileptiform activity was induced by intracortical (i.c.) microinjection of penicillin into the left sensorimotor cortex. Thirty minutes after penicillin injection, 5, 10, or 20 mg/kg doses of fluoxetine were administered intraperitoneally (i.p.). An ECoG recording was performed for 180 min using the data acquisition system. The frequency and the amplitude of the epileptiform activity were analyzed. RESULTS: Penicillin induced bilateral spikes and spike-wave complexes within 2-5 min. The 5 and 10 mg/kg doses of fluoxetine significantly reduced the frequency (58%, p < 0.05 and 69%, p < 0.01, 40 and 50 min after fluoxetine injection, respectively) and amplitude (60%, p < 0.01 and 73%, p < 0.05, 40 and 120 min after fluoxetine injection, respectively) of epileptiform activity compared with penicillin-induced seizure group (control). Five-milligram fluoxetine (i.p.) was the most effective dose to decrease frequency and amplitude on penicillin-induced epileptiform activity. However, a higher fluoxetine dose (20 mg/kg) significantly increased frequency (147%, p < 0.01) and amplitude (123%, p < 0.05) of epileptiform activity 40 and 120 min after fluoxetine administration compared with control group. Also, bursts of population spikes were seen in 20 mg/kg fluoxetine doses. CONCLUSION: Results of the present study indicate that low and moderate fluoxetine doses have an anticonvulsant effect while high doses have proconvulsant effect on penicillin-induced epileptic activity.

Low-frequency electroacupuncture suppresses focal epilepsy and improves epilepsy-induced sleep disruptions.

BACKGROUND: The positive effects of acupuncture at Feng-Chi acupoints on treating epilepsy and insomnia have been well-documented in ancient Chinese literature. However, there is a lack of scientific evidence to elucidate the underlying mechanisms behind these effects. Our previous study demonstrated that high-frequency (100 Hz) electroacupuncture (EA) at Feng-Chi acupoints deteriorates both pilocarpine-induced focal epilepsy and sleep disruptions. This study investigated the effects of low-frequency (10 Hz) EA on epileptic activities and epilepsy-induced sleep disruptions. RESULTS: In rats, the Feng-Chi acupoint is located 3 mm away from the center of a line between the two ears. Rats received 30 min of 10 Hz EA stimuli per day before each day's dark period for three consecutive days. Our results indicated that administration of pilocarpine into the left CeA at the beginning of the dark period induced focal epilepsy and decreased both rapid eye movement (REM) sleep and non-REM (NREM) sleep during the consequent light period. Low-frequency (10 Hz) EA at Feng-Chi acupoints suppressed pilocarpine-induced epileptiform EEGs, and this effect was in turn blocked by naloxone (a broad-spectrum opioid receptor antagonist), but not by naloxonazine (a µ-receptor antagonist), naltrindole (a δ-receptor antagonist) and nor-binaltorphimine (a κ-receptor antagonist). Ten Hz EA enhanced NREM sleep during the dark period, and this enhancement was blocked by all of the opioid receptor antagonists. On the other hand, 10 Hz EA reversed pilocarpine-induced NREM suppression during the light period, and the EA's effect on the sleep disruption was only blocked by naloxonazine. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that low-frequency EA stimulation of Feng-Chi acupoints is beneficial in improving epilepsy and epilepsy-induced sleep disruptions, and that opioid receptors in the CeA mediate EA's therapeutic effects.

Prospective study of cenobamate on cognition, affectivity, and quality of life in focal epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: Cenobamate is a recently approved antiseizure medication that proved to be safe and effective in randomized controlled trials. However, little is known about its impact on some areas frequently affected by epilepsy. For this reason, we explored the effects of cenobamate on cognitive performance, as well as on negative affectivity and quality of life in a sample of patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. METHODS: Two prospective cohort studies were carried out. In Study 1, 32 patients (22 men and 10 women) underwent a baseline (T0) and a short-term (T1) neuropsychological assessment after 3 months of cenobamate administration. In Study 2, 22 patients (16 men and 6 women) from the T1 sample also underwent a baseline and a follow-up evaluation (T2) 6 months after T0. RESULTS: No significant differences were found in cognitive variables, negative affectivity, and quality of life either in Study 1 or Study 2. Similarly, based on the reliable change index, it was found that most patients showed no changes in these variables. SIGNIFICANCE: These results suggest that cenobamate is a safe antiseizure medication in terms of cognition, negative affectivity, or quality of life since no adverse events have been found after 3 and 6 months of treatment. PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY: Cenobamate is a new antiseizure medication. In patients with epilepsy, cenobamate seems to not affect cognition, anxiety, depression, or quality of life.

Evaluation of the role of chronic daily melatonin administration and pinealectomy on penicillin-induced focal epileptiform activity and spectral analysis of ECoG in rats: an in vivo electrophysiological study.

In the present study, we aimed to investigate the effects of pinealectomy and chronic melatonin administration on focal epileptiform activity induced by penicillin in the rat cortex and to determine the relation between melatonin levels and electrocorticogram (ECoG) power spectrum. For this purpose, male Sprague-Dawley rats were divided into six groups: control, sham operated, ethanol, melatonin, pinealectomy and pinealectomy + melatonin group. Melatonin-treated rats was intraperitoneally injected with a daily single dose of 10 mg/kg melatonin for 14 days, but the last dose was given 30 min after local application of penicillin as a convulsant agent. Focal epileptiform activity was produced by intracortical administration of penicillin (200 units/1 µl). While chronic melatonin application did not affect either the onset latency or the spike frequency of epileptiform activity, pinealectomy significantly reduced latency to onset of initial epileptiform discharges and increased cortical epileptiform activity. However, acute melatonin administration decreased the epileptiform activity. The results also indicated that exogenously applied melatonin did not change the spectral analysis of ECoG, but pinealectomy led to a reduction in the power of the fast bands (gamma) power in ECoG. We conclude that endogenous melatonin signaling seem to have a tonic inhibitory action on neuronal excitability and epileptiform activity, and also a certain concentration of melatonin required for normal cortical excitability.

Effects of antibodies to glutamate on focal penicillin-induced epileptic activity.

The effects of intranasal pretreatment with antibodies against glutamate on focal penicillin-induced epileptic activity were studied by recording electrocorticogram in non-anesthetized freely moving male Wistar rats. Anticonvulsant effects of intranasal administration of anti-glutamate antibodies (300 µg/kg) 1 h before application of penicillin (30,000 U/ml) on the sensorimotor cortex was demonstrated: the latency of ictal discharges increased and their frequency decreased.

Efficacy and tolerability of oxcarbazepine in the treatment of focal epilepsy in neonates and infants under 3 months of age: A single-center retrospective analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The neonatal and infantile period is the age group with the highest incidence of epilepsy, in which gene variants in sodium and potassium channels are an important etiology, so the sodium channel blocker class of antiseizure medications may be effective in the treatment of early onset epilepsy. This study aimed to summarize the efficacy and tolerability of oxcarbazepine (OXC) in the treatment of focal epilepsy in neonates and infants under 3 months of age. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of children with focal epilepsy onset within 3 months of age and treated with OXC in a tertiary pediatric epilepsy center in China was conducted. The efficacy, tolerability and influencing factors of OXC were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 50 patients were enrolled, with a median age of epilepsy onset of 11.5 (2, 42) days. There were 32 cases of early infantile developmental and epileptic encephalopathy, 10 cases of self-limited neonatal or neonatal-infantile epilepsy, and 8 cases of focal epilepsy that could not be classified as epileptic syndrome. The median age of application of OXC was 47 (31, 66) days. The median follow-up time was 16.5 (10, 25) months, with 7 deaths. Thirty-eight cases (76.0 %) were effective with OXC treatment, including 28 cases (56.0 %) achieved seizure freedom. Of the 34 cases whose pathogenesis involved genetic factors, 19 cases with sodium/ potassium channel gene variants had higher effective and seizure-free rates than those with other gene variants. The most common adverse event was transient hyponatremia. 2 cases had rash and 2 cases had abnormal electrocardiogram, 3 of which discontinued OXC. SIGNIFICANCE: This single-center retrospective study suggests that OXC is effective and tolerable for the treatment of focal epilepsy in neonates and infants under 3 months of age. The efficacy of OXC is better in patients with sodium/ potassium channel gene variants.

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

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

The adaptation of the desirability of outcome ranking for interventional clinical trials in epilepsy: A novel consumer-led outcome measure.

Interventional clinical trials in epilepsy are typically designed and powered to detect a change in seizure frequency as the primary endpoint, with little consideration given to other benefits or harms of the therapy, or impacts on common epilepsy comorbidities. Desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) is a novel methodology for evaluating benefits and harms associated with introduction of a new treatment. Multiple outcomes are combined and the resulting combinations are ranked according to their desirability. Herein we describe the adaptation of DOOR for use in therapy trials in epilepsy. Consumers with epilepsy were presented with a selection of measures typically included in epilepsy trials and asked to rank their importance in terms of a desirable outcome and to identify interactions between different seizure control levels and other measures. Seizure control, adverse events, and psychiatric comorbidities were identified as most important, and combinations of these outcomes were ranked to form epilepsy-DOOR. A separate consumer discussion group verified the appropriateness and accuracy of the ranking. The resultant epilepsy-DOOR includes 60 possible outcomes, representing high granularity for the assessment of future interventions. It demonstrates the importance of consumer involvement in trial design and presents an alternative to seizure frequency for evaluating new treatments for epilepsy.

Cutaneous Hypersensitivity Reaction After Phenytoin Therapy in a Neonate: A Case Report and Review of Literature Elucidating the Potential Pharmacological Plausibility and Preventive Strategies.

BACKGROUND: Drug-induced hypersensitivity reaction is a potentially life-threatening condition reported among patients of different age groups. Phenytoin is a prototypic drug prescribed for the treatment of a variety of seizure disorders. Allergic reaction to phenytoin therapy in a newborn is relatively a rare clinical manifestation that is not frequently reported. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to report a suspected case of hypersensitivity reaction in a newborn possibly due to phenytoin and the strategies to prevent these immune-mediated reactions. CASE REPORT: An early term newborn on the 4th day of life developed erythematous rashes over the abdominal region following phenytoin treatment for recurrent generalized tonic-clonic seizures. Prenatal history was uneventful except for the mother had preeclampsia during the third trimester of pregnancy. The suspected phenytoin was replaced with phenobarbitone to control seizure episodes. Subsequently, the rashes disappeared. The baby had also suffered from skin discolouration after phototherapy. Radiological investigations and cerebrospinal fluid culture were performed to detect the etiology of seizures. CONCLUSION: Hypersensitivity reaction to phenytoin in newborns is a rare clinical entity but may lead to serious lethal complications. Thus, stringent clinical monitoring of patients on phenytoin therapy is mandatory, especially in the pediatric population.

Gabapentin monotherapy for epilepsy: A review.

BACKGROUND: Epilepsy is one of the most common chronic neurological disorders, affecting more than 50 million people globally. In this review we summarised the evidence from randomised controlled trials of gabapentin used as monotherapy for the treatment of focal epilepsy, both newly diagnosed and drug-resistant, with or without secondary generalisation. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of gabapentin monotherapy for people with epileptic focal seizures with and without secondary generalisation. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 24 February 2020) on 25 February 2020. CRS Web includes randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRA), and the specialised registers of Cochrane Review Groups including the Cochrane Epilepsy Group. We also searched several Russian databases, reference lists of relevant studies, ongoing trials registers, conference proceedings, and we contacted trial authors. RESULTS: We found five randomised controlled trials (3167 participants) comparing gabapentin to other antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and differing doses of gabapentin as monotherapy for newly diagnosed focal epilepsy and drug- resistant focal epilepsy with or without secondary generalisation. Two review authors independently applied the inclusion criteria, assessed trial quality, risk of bias, and extracted data. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence and present seven patient-important outcomes in the "Summary of findings" tables. The quality of evidence was very low to moderate due to poor reporting quality, poor trial design, and other risks of bias, such as selective presentation of findings and potential heavy industry input. Better quality research may change our certainty in the effect estimates. None of the included trials reported on the number of people with 50% or greater reduction in seizures and time to withdrawal (retention time) in an extractable way. Gabapentin-treated participants were more likely to withdraw from treatment for any cause (285/539) than those treated with lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, or topiramate pooled together (695/1317) (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.25; 3 studies, 1856 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), but not carbamazepine. Fewer people treated with gabapentin withdrew from treatment owing to adverse events (190/525) than those treated with carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine, or topiramate (479/1238), (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.91; 1763 participants, 3 studies; moderate-certainty evidence), but not lamotrigine. CONCLUSION: Gabapentin as monotherapy probably controlled seizures no better and no worse than comparator AEDs (lamotrigine, carbamazepine, oxcarbazepine, and topiramate). Compared to carbamazepine, gabapentin was probably better in retaining people in studies and preventing withdrawals due to adverse events. The most common side effects associated with gabapentin were ataxia (poor co-ordination and unsteady gait), dizziness, fatigue, and drowsiness.