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.

New-onset seizures in older people: Clinical features, course and outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The incidence of epilepsy increases with age. With current demographic trends, this presents a healthcare challenge. We investigated the clinical spectrum of first seizures, evaluated neuroimaging and EEG findings, and determined clinical outcomes, including anti-seizure medication (ASM) response in older people. In addition, we sought to understand the relative effects of age and frailty on ASM response. METHODS: A retrospective single centre cohort study of 207 cases ≥60 years' old, 113 of whom were eventually diagnosed with a first seizure in a specialist epilepsy clinic. RESULTS: 65/113 (57.5%) presented with either focal aware or focal impaired awareness seizures. Stroke was the most common aetiological association (31.9%, 36/113), and odds of seizure recurrence did not significantly differ between aetiologies. 55/86 (64.0%) who started an ASM had no seizure recurrence. 14/48 (29.2%) who underwent EEG had epileptiform abnormalities, however EEG result directly affected management in only 4/48 (8.3%). The most common MRI findings were small vessel disease (37/93, 39.8%), stroke (27/93, 29.0%) and global atrophy (14/93, 15.1%). Increasing age and frailty did not affect the odds of seizure recurrence or of experiencing ASM side effects. Severity of small vessel disease or atrophy did not affect odds of seizure recurrence. CONCLUSION: Our data inform the management of first seizures in older people and provisionally support the use of ASMs in patients with increasing age and frailty, despite concerns over polypharmacy and comorbidity. Our findings should be replicated in larger cohorts.

Study Protocol: The Heart and Brain Study.

BACKGROUND: It is well-established that what is good for the heart is good for the brain. Vascular factors such as hypertension, diabetes, and high cholesterol, and genetic factors such as the apolipoprotein E4 allele increase the risk of developing both cardiovascular disease and dementia. However, the mechanisms underlying the heart-brain association remain unclear. Recent evidence suggests that impairments in vascular phenotypes and cerebrovascular reactivity (CVR) may play an important role in cognitive decline. The Heart and Brain Study combines state-of-the-art vascular ultrasound, cerebrovascular magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and cognitive testing in participants of the long-running Whitehall II Imaging cohort to examine these processes together. This paper describes the study protocol, data pre-processing and overarching objectives. METHODS AND DESIGN: The 775 participants of the Whitehall II Imaging cohort, aged 65 years or older in 2019, have received clinical and vascular risk assessments at 5-year-intervals since 1985, as well as a 3T brain MRI scan and neuropsychological tests between 2012 and 2016 (Whitehall II Wave MRI-1). Approximately 25% of this cohort are selected for the Heart and Brain Study, which involves a single testing session at the University of Oxford (Wave MRI-2). Between 2019 and 2023, participants will undergo ultrasound scans of the ascending aorta and common carotid arteries, measures of central and peripheral blood pressure, and 3T MRI scans to measure CVR in response to 5% carbon dioxide in air, vessel-selective cerebral blood flow (CBF), and cerebrovascular lesions. The structural and diffusion MRI scans and neuropsychological battery conducted at Wave MRI-1 will also be repeated. Using this extensive life-course data, the Heart and Brain Study will examine how 30-year trajectories of vascular risk throughout midlife (40-70 years) affect vascular phenotypes, cerebrovascular health, longitudinal brain atrophy and cognitive decline at older ages. DISCUSSION: The study will generate one of the most comprehensive datasets to examine the longitudinal determinants of the heart-brain association. It will evaluate novel physiological processes in order to describe the optimal window for managing vascular risk in order to delay cognitive decline. Ultimately, the Heart and Brain Study will inform strategies to identify at-risk individuals for targeted interventions to prevent or delay dementia.

The effects of acute cannabidiol on cerebral blood flow and its relationship to memory: An arterial spin labelling magnetic resonance imaging study.

BACKGROUND: Cannabidiol (CBD) is being investigated as a potential treatment for several medical indications, many of which are characterised by altered memory processing. However, the mechanisms underlying these effects are unclear. AIMS: Our primary aim was to investigate how CBD influences cerebral blood flow (CBF) in regions involved in memory processing. Our secondary aim was to determine if the effects of CBD on CBF were associated with differences in working and episodic memory task performance. METHODS: We used a randomised, crossover, double-blind design in which 15 healthy participants were administered 600 mg oral CBD or placebo on separate days. We measured regional CBF at rest using arterial spin labelling 3 h after drug ingestion. We assessed working memory with the digit span (forward, backward) and n-back (0-back, 1-back, 2-back) tasks, and we used a prose recall task (immediate and delayed) to assess episodic memory. RESULTS: CBD increased CBF in the hippocampus (mean (95% confidence intervals) = 15.00 (5.78-24.21) mL/100 g/min, t14 = 3.489, Cohen's d = 0.75, p = 0.004). There were no differences in memory task performance, but there was a significant correlation whereby greater CBD-induced increases in orbitofrontal CBF were associated with reduced reaction time on the 2-back working memory task ( r= -0.73, p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that CBD increases CBF to key regions involved in memory processing, particularly the hippocampus. These results identify potential mechanisms of CBD for a range of conditions associated with altered memory processing, including Alzheimer's disease, schizophrenia, post-traumatic stress disorder and cannabis-use disorders.

The acute effects of cannabidiol on the neural correlates of reward anticipation and feedback in healthy volunteers.

BACKGROUND: Cannabidiol has potential therapeutic benefits for people with psychiatric disorders characterised by reward function impairment. There is existing evidence that cannabidiol may influence some aspects of reward processing. However, it is unknown whether cannabidiol acutely affects brain function underpinning reward anticipation and feedback. HYPOTHESES: We predicted that cannabidiol would augment brain activity associated with reward anticipation and feedback. METHODS: We administered a single 600 mg oral dose of cannabidiol and matched placebo to 23 healthy participants in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, repeated-measures design. We employed the monetary incentive delay task during functional magnetic resonance imaging to assay the neural correlates of reward anticipation and feedback. We conducted whole brain analyses and region-of-interest analyses in pre-specified reward-related brain regions. RESULTS: The monetary incentive delay task elicited expected brain activity during reward anticipation and feedback, including in the insula, caudate, nucleus accumbens, anterior cingulate and orbitofrontal cortex. However, across the whole brain, we did not find any evidence that cannabidiol altered reward-related brain activity. Moreover, our Bayesian analyses showed that activity in our regions-of-interest was similar following cannabidiol and placebo. Additionally, our behavioural measures of motivation for reward did not show a significant difference between cannabidiol and placebo. DISCUSSION: Cannabidiol did not acutely affect the neural correlates of reward anticipation and feedback in healthy participants. Future research should explore the effects of cannabidiol on different components of reward processing, employ different doses and administration regimens, and test its reward-related effects in people with psychiatric disorders.

The neuropsychopharmacology of cannabis: A review of human imaging studies.

The laws governing cannabis are evolving worldwide and associated with changing patterns of use. The main psychoactive drug in cannabis is Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), a partial agonist at the endocannabinoid CB1 receptor. Acutely, cannabis and THC produce a range of effects on several neurocognitive and pharmacological systems. These include effects on executive, emotional, reward and memory processing via direct interactions with the endocannabinoid system and indirect effects on the glutamatergic, GABAergic and dopaminergic systems. Cannabidiol, a non-intoxicating cannabinoid found in some forms of cannabis, may offset some of these acute effects. Heavy repeated cannabis use, particularly during adolescence, has been associated with adverse effects on these systems, which increase the risk of mental illnesses including addiction and psychosis. Here, we provide a comprehensive state of the art review on the acute and chronic neuropsychopharmacology of cannabis by synthesizing the available neuroimaging research in humans. We describe the effects of drug exposure during development, implications for understanding psychosis and cannabis use disorder, and methodological considerations. Greater understanding of the precise mechanisms underlying the effects of cannabis may also give rise to new treatment targets.