Estimating the active and lifetime prevalence and incidence of epilepsy in Asian Countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: In the current era of the World Health Organization's Intersectoral Global Action Plan on Epilepsy and Other Neurological Disorders 2022-2031 (IGAP), precise and updated estimates of epilepsy burden are vital in formulating policies to improve the care of persons with epilepsy, especially in Asian countries with significant treatment gap. Hence, we aimed to consolidate the available data and quantify epilepsy prevalence and incidence estimates in Asian countries. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Ovid, and Scopus databases from inception until March 2023 for studies reporting epilepsy prevalence and incidence in Asian countries. We applied random effects meta-analysis to generate the pooled prevalence and incidence using the Meta package in R. Additionally, we performed a subgroup meta-analysis to explore the potential sources of heterogeneity. A meta-regression analysis was conducted to examine the trend of epilepsy over time. RESULTS: A total of 99 studies with 100,654,124 participants were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence was 5.6 per 1000 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 4.4-6.8) for active epilepsy and 6.7 per 1000 (95 % CI 5.7-7.9) for lifetime epilepsy. The pooled incidence rate of epilepsy was 52.5 per 100,000 person-years (95 % CI 42.7-79.4). The subgroup analysis revealed a higher prevalence of active epilepsy (6.7/1000) and lifetime epilepsy (8.6/1000) in West Asia than in other regions. The funnel plot and Egger's test (p-value =<0.0001) revealed publication bias for active epilepsy. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight a high prevalence of active and lifetime epilepsy in West Asia and emphasize the necessity of implementing and formulating specific strategies to tackle the epilepsy burden in this region. Furthermore, high-quality epidemiological studies incorporating economic burdens and comorbidities associated with epilepsy in Asia are still needed.

The SANAD II study of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam, zonisamide, or lamotrigine for newly diagnosed focal epilepsy: an open-label, non-inferiority, multicentre, phase 4, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Levetiracetam and zonisamide are licensed as monotherapy for patients with focal epilepsy, but there is uncertainty as to whether they should be recommended as first-line treatments because of insufficient evidence of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. We aimed to assess the long-term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam and zonisamide compared with lamotrigine in people with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy. METHODS: This randomised, open-label, controlled trial compared levetiracetam and zonisamide with lamotrigine as first-line treatment for patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy. Adult and paediatric neurology services across the UK recruited participants aged 5 years or older (with no upper age limit) with two or more unprovoked focal seizures. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1:1) using a minimisation programme with a random element utilising factor to receive lamotrigine, levetiracetam, or zonisamide. Participants and investigators were not masked and were aware of treatment allocation. SANAD II was designed to assess non-inferiority of both levetiracetam and zonisamide to lamotrigine for the primary outcome of time to 12-month remission. Anti-seizure medications were taken orally and for participants aged 12 years or older the initial advised maintenance doses were lamotrigine 50 mg (morning) and 100 mg (evening), levetiracetam 500 mg twice per day, and zonisamide 100 mg twice per day. For children aged between 5 and 12 years the initial daily maintenance doses advised were lamotrigine 1·5 mg/kg twice per day, levetiracetam 20 mg/kg twice per day, and zonisamide 2·5 mg/kg twice per day. All participants were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. The per-protocol (PP) analysis excluded participants with major protocol deviations and those who were subsequently diagnosed as not having epilepsy. Safety analysis included all participants who received one dose of any study drug. The non-inferiority limit was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·329, which equates to an absolute difference of 10%. A HR greater than 1 indicated that an event was more likely on lamotrigine. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 30294119 (EudraCt number: 2012-001884-64). FINDINGS: 990 participants were recruited between May 2, 2013, and June 20, 2017, and followed up for a further 2 years. Patients were randomly assigned to receive lamotrigine (n=330), levetiracetam (n=332), or zonisamide (n=328). The ITT analysis included all participants and the PP analysis included 324 participants randomly assigned to lamotrigine, 320 participants randomly assigned to levetiracetam, and 315 participants randomly assigned to zonisamide. Levetiracetam did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the ITT analysis of time to 12-month remission versus lamotrigine (HR 1·18; 97·5% CI 0·95-1·47) but zonisamide did meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the ITT analysis versus lamotrigine (1·03; 0·83-1·28). The PP analysis showed that 12-month remission was superior with lamotrigine than both levetiracetam (HR 1·32 [97·5% CI 1·05 to 1·66]) and zonisamide (HR 1·37 [1·08-1·73]). There were 37 deaths during the trial. Adverse reactions were reported by 108 (33%) participants who started lamotrigine, 144 (44%) participants who started levetiracetam, and 146 (45%) participants who started zonisamide. Lamotrigine was superior in the cost-utility analysis, with a higher net health benefit of 1·403 QALYs (97·5% central range 1·319-1·458) compared with 1·222 (1·110-1·283) for levetiracetam and 1·232 (1·112, 1·307) for zonisamide at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000 per QALY. Cost-effectiveness was based on differences between treatment groups in costs and QALYs. INTERPRETATION: These findings do not support the use of levetiracetam or zonisamide as first-line treatments for patients with focal epilepsy. Lamotrigine should remain a first-line treatment for patients with focal epilepsy and should be the standard treatment in future trials. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

The SANAD II study of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of valproate versus levetiracetam for newly diagnosed generalised and unclassifiable epilepsy: an open-label, non-inferiority, multicentre, phase 4, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Valproate is a first-line treatment for patients with newly diagnosed idiopathic generalised or difficult to classify epilepsy, but not for women of child-bearing potential because of teratogenicity. Levetiracetam is increasingly prescribed for these patient populations despite scarcity of evidence of clinical effectiveness or cost-effectiveness. We aimed to compare the long-term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam compared with valproate in participants with newly diagnosed generalised or unclassifiable epilepsy. METHODS: We did an open-label, randomised controlled trial to compare levetiracetam with valproate as first-line treatment for patients with generalised or unclassified epilepsy. Adult and paediatric neurology services (69 centres overall) across the UK recruited participants aged 5 years or older (with no upper age limit) with two or more unprovoked generalised or unclassifiable seizures. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either levetiracetam or valproate, using a minimisation programme with a random element utilising factors. Participants and investigators were aware of treatment allocation. For participants aged 12 years or older, the initial advised maintenance doses were 500 mg twice per day for levetiracetam and valproate, and for children aged 5-12 years, the initial daily maintenance doses advised were 25 mg/kg for valproate and 40 mg/kg for levetiracetam. All drugs were administered orally. SANAD II was designed to assess the non-inferiority of levetiracetam compared with valproate for the primary outcome time to 12-month remission. The non-inferiority limit was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·314, which equates to an absolute difference of 10%. A HR greater than 1 indicated that an event was more likely on valproate. All participants were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. Per-protocol (PP) analyses excluded participants with major protocol deviations and those who were subsequently diagnosed as not having epilepsy. Safety analyses included all participants who received one dose of any study drug. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 30294119 (EudraCt number: 2012-001884-64). FINDINGS: 520 participants were recruited between April 30, 2013, and Aug 2, 2016, and followed up for a further 2 years. 260 participants were randomly allocated to receive levetiracetam and 260 participants to receive valproate. The ITT analysis included all participants and the PP analysis included 255 participants randomly allocated to valproate and 254 randomly allocated to levetiracetam. Median age of participants was 13·9 years (range 5·0-94·4), 65% were male and 35% were female, 397 participants had generalised epilepsy, and 123 unclassified epilepsy. Levetiracetam did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the ITT analysis of time to 12-month remission (HR 1·19 [95% CI 0·96-1·47]); non-inferiority margin 1·314. The PP analysis showed that the 12-month remission was superior with valproate than with levetiracetam. There were two deaths, one in each group, that were unrelated to trial treatments. Adverse reactions were reported by 96 (37%) participants randomly assigned to valproate and 107 (42%) participants randomly assigned to levetiracetam. Levetiracetam was dominated by valproate in the cost-utility analysis, with a negative incremental net health benefit of -0·040 (95% central range -0·175 to 0·037) and a probability of 0·17 of being cost-effectiveness at a threshold of £20 000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Cost-effectiveness was based on differences between treatment groups in costs and quality-adjusted life-years. INTERPRETATION: Compared with valproate, levetiracetam was found to be neither clinically effective nor cost-effective. For girls and women of child-bearing potential, these results inform discussions about benefit and harm of avoiding valproate. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme.

Fetal antiepileptic drug exposure and learning and memory functioning at 6 years of age: The NEAD prospective observational study.

The Neurodevelopmental Effects of Antiepileptic Drugs (NEAD) Study was a prospective observational multicenter study in the USA and UK, which enrolled pregnant women with epilepsy on antiepileptic drug (AED) monotherapy from 1999 to 2004. The study aimed to determine if differential long-term neurodevelopmental effects exist across four commonly used AEDs (carbamazepine, lamotrigine, phenytoin, and valproate). In this report, we examine fetal AED exposure effects on learning and memory functions in 221 six-year-old children (including four sets of twins) whose mothers took one of these AEDs during pregnancy. Their performance was compared with that of a national sample of normally developing six year olds from the standardization sample of the Children's Memory Scale (CMS). The major results of this study indicate that the mean performance levels of children exposed to valproate were significantly below that of the children in the normal comparison group across all seven of the CMS Indexes. With one exception, this finding held up at the subtest level as well. These findings taken together with nonsignificant verbal and nonverbal forgetting scores appear to indicate that, as a group, children exposed to valproate experienced significant difficulty in their ability to process, encode, and learn both auditory/verbal as well as visual/nonverbal material. In addition, they exhibited significant difficulty holding and manipulating information in immediate auditory working memory. However, once the information was learned and stored, the valproate-exposed children appeared to be able to retrieve the information they did learn at normal levels. Finally, the processing, working memory, and learning deficits demonstrated by the valproate-exposed children are dose-related. In contrast to valproate, the findings pertaining to the children exposed to carbamazepine, lamotrigine, and phenytoin in monotherapy are less clear. Therefore, further research will be required to delineate the potential risks to learning and memory functions in children exposed to carbamazepine, lamotrigine, and phenytoin in monotherapy during pregnancy. Additional research employing larger prospective studies will be required to confirm the long-term cognitive and behavioral risks to children of mothers who are prescribed these four AEDs during pregnancy as well as to delineate any potential risks of newer AEDs and to understand the underlying mechanisms of adverse AED effects on the immature brain.

Does the concept of resilience contribute to understanding good quality of life in the context of epilepsy?

A significant body of research highlights negative impacts of epilepsy for individual quality of life (QOL). Poor seizure control is frequently associated with reporting of poor QOL and good seizure control with good QOL; however, this is not a universal finding. Evidence suggests that some people enjoy good QOL despite ongoing seizures while others report poor QOL despite good seizure control. Understanding the factors that influence QOL for people with epilepsy and the processes via which such factors exert their influence is central to the development of interventions to support people with epilepsy to experience the best possible QOL. We present findings of a qualitative investigation exploring influences and processes on QOL for people with epilepsy. We describe the clinical, psychological, and social factors contributing to QOL. In particular, we focus on the value of the concept of resilience for understanding quality of life in epilepsy. Based on our analysis, we propose a model of resilience wherein four key component sets of factors interact to determine QOL. This model reflects the fluid nature of resilience that, we suggest, is subject to change based on shifts within the individual components and the interactions between them. The model offers a representation of the complex influences that act and interact to either mitigate or further compound the negative impacts of epilepsy on individual QOL.

NRSF and BDNF polymorphisms as biomarkers of cognitive dysfunction in adults with newly diagnosed epilepsy.

Cognitive dysfunction is a common comorbidity in people with epilepsy, but its causes remain unclear. It may be related to the etiology of the disorder, the consequences of seizures, or the effects of antiepileptic drug treatment. Genetics may also play a contributory role. We investigated the influence of variants in the genes encoding neuron-restrictive silencer factor (NRSF) and brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), proteins previously associated with cognition and epilepsy, on cognitive function in people with newly diagnosed epilepsy. A total of 82 patients who had previously undergone detailed neuropsychological assessment were genotyped for single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) across the NRSF and BDNF genes. Putatively functional SNPs were included in a genetic association analysis with specific cognitive domains, including memory, psychomotor speed, and information processing. Cross-sectional and longitudinal designs were used to explore genetic influences on baseline cognition at diagnosis and change from baseline over the first year since diagnosis, respectively. We found a statistically significant association between genotypic variation and memory function at both baseline (NRSF: rs1105434, rs2227902 and BDNF: rs1491850, rs2030324, rs11030094) and in our longitudinal analysis (NRSF: rs2227902 and BDNF: rs12273363). Psychomotor speed was also associated with genotype (NRSF rs3796529) in the longitudinal assessment. In line with our previous work on general cognitive function in the healthy aging population, we observed an additive interaction between risk alleles for the NRSF rs2227902 (G) and BDNF rs6265 (A) polymorphisms which was again consistent with a significantly greater decline in delayed recall over the first year since diagnosis. These findings support a role for the NRSF-BDNF pathway in the modulation of cognitive function in patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy.

Quality-of-life outcomes of initiating treatment with standard and newer antiepileptic drugs in adults with new-onset epilepsy: findings from the SANAD trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare quality-of-life (QoL) outcomes over 2 years following initiation of treatment with a standard or newer antiepileptic drug (AED) in adults with new-onset epilepsy. To examine the impact of seizure remission and failure of initial treatment on QoL outcomes measured over 2 years. METHODS: We conducted a pragmatic, randomized, unblinded, multicenter, parallel-group clinical trial (the Standard and New Antiepileptic Drugs [SANAD] trial) comparing clinical and cost effectiveness of initiating treatment with carbamazepine versus lamotrigine, gabapentin, oxcarbazepine and topiramate, and valproate versus lamotrigine and topiramate. QoL data were collected by mail at baseline, 3 months, and at 1 and 2 years using validated measures. These data were analyzed using longitudinal data models. Continuous QoL measures, time to 12-month remission and time to treatment withdrawal were explored using joint models. RESULTS: Baseline questionnaires were returned by 1,575 adults; 1,439 returned the 3-month questionnaire, 1,274 returned the 1-year questionnaire, and 1,121 returned the 2-year questionnaire. There were few statistically significant differences between drugs over 2 years in QoL outcomes. Significant association was identified between QoL scores over the 2-year time frame and the risk of experiencing a 12-month remission or treatment withdrawal over that period. SIGNIFICANCE: The choice of initial treatment had no significant effect on QoL by 2-year follow-up. However, overall QoL was reduced with continued seizures, adverse events, and failure of the initial treatment.

Indications and expectations for neuropsychological assessment in routine epilepsy care: Report of the ILAE Neuropsychology Task Force, Diagnostic Methods Commission, 2013-2017.

The International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Diagnostic Methods Commission charged the Neuropsychology Task Force with the job of developing a set of recommendations to address the following questions: (1) What is the role of a neuropsychological assessment? (2) Who should do a neuropsychological assessment? (3) When should people with epilepsy be referred for a neuropsychological assessment? and (4) What should be expected from a neuropsychological assessment? The recommendations have been broadly written for health care clinicians in established epilepsy settings as well as those setting up new services. They are based on a detailed survey of neuropsychological assessment practices across international epilepsy centers, and formal ranking of specific recommendations for advancing clinical epilepsy care generated by specialist epilepsy neuropsychologists from around the world. They also incorporate the latest research findings to establish minimum standards for training and practice, reflecting the many roles of neuropsychological assessment in the routine care of children and adults with epilepsy. The recommendations endorse routine screening of cognition, mood, and behavior in new-onset epilepsy, and describe the range of situations when more detailed, formal neuropsychological assessment is indicated. They identify a core set of cognitive and psychological domains that should be assessed to provide an objective account of an individual's cognitive, emotional, and psychosocial functioning, including factors likely contributing to deficits identified on qualitative and quantitative examination. The recommendations also endorse routine provision of feedback to patients, families, and clinicians about the implications of the assessment results, including specific clinical recommendations of what can be done to improve a patient's cognitive or psychosocial functioning and alleviate the distress of any difficulties identified. By canvassing the breadth and depth of scope of neuropsychological assessment, this report demonstrates the pivotal role played by this noninvasive and minimally resource intensive investigation in the care of people with epilepsy.

Pharmacogenetic testing prior to carbamazepine treatment of epilepsy: patients' and physicians' preferences for testing and service delivery.

AIM: Pharmacogenetic studies have identified the presence of the HLA-A*31:01 allele as a predictor of cutaneous adverse drugs reactions (ADRs) to carbamazepine. This study aimed to ascertain the preferences of patients and clinicians to inform carbamazepine pharmacogenetic testing services. METHODS: Attributes of importance to people with epilepsy and neurologists were identified through interviews and from published sources. Discrete choice experiments (DCEs) were conducted in 82 people with epilepsy and 83 neurologists. Random-effects logit regression models were used to determine the importance of the attributes and direction of effect. RESULTS: In the patient DCE, all attributes (seizure remission, reduction in seizure frequency, memory problems, skin rash and rare, severe ADRs) were significant. The estimated utility of testing was greater, at 0.52 (95% CI 0.19, 1.00) than not testing at 0.33 (95% CI -0.07, 0.81). In the physician DCE, cost, inclusion in the British National Formulary, coverage, negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV) were significant. Marginal rates of substitution indicated that neurologists were willing to pay £5.87 for a 1 percentage point increase in NPV and £3.99 for a 1 percentage point increase in PPV. CONCLUSION: The inclusion of both patients' and clinicians' perspectives represents an important contribution to the understanding of preferences towards pharmacogenetic testing prior to initiating carbamazepine. Both groups identified different attributes but had generally consistent preferences. Patients' acceptance of a decrease in treatment benefit for a reduced chance of severe ADRs adds support for the implementation of HLA-A*31:01 testing in routine practice.

Self-reported anxiety and sleep problems in people with epilepsy and their association with quality of life.

Comorbidities are common in epilepsy, and their role in quality of life (QOL) is receiving increasing scrutiny. Considerable attention has been focused on the role of depression, the most common comorbidity, with rather less attention paid to its frequent concomitant, anxiety, and other conditions known to be at increased prevalence among people with epilepsy (PWE) when compared to the general population. In this paper, we report findings from a UK-based survey in which we examined self-reporting of two common comorbidities, anxiety and sleep problems, factors associated with them, and their role in QOL in people with and without epilepsy. Data were obtained via mailed questionnaires, supplemented by an internet survey, from PWE and age- and gender-matched controls. Based on self-reported symptoms, PWE were at higher risk of anxiety and sleep problems. Contributory factors for anxiety included poorer general health, worry about seizures, and self-reported antiepileptic drug (AED) side effects. Good social support emerged as protective for anxiety in PWE. Nighttime sleep problems were very common even in controls but were further elevated in PWE. Antiepileptic drug adverse events emerged as an important contributory factor for sleep problems. Trait anxiety emerged as significant for defining overall QOL, and its importance over state anxiety supports the notion of anxiety in PWE as a primarily premorbid condition. In contrast, sleep quality was not consistently predictive of QOL. Our study has important implications for clinical management, emphasizing the need for a holistic approach to address wider patient-reported problems as well as any epilepsy-specific ones.

Neuropsychological and psychological interventions for people with newly diagnosed epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: Many people with epilepsy report experiencing psychological difficulties such as anxiety, depression and neuropsychological deficits including memory problems. Research has shown that these difficulties are often present not only for people with chronic epilepsy but also for people with newly diagnosed epilepsy. Despite this, there are very few published interventions that detail means to help people with newly diagnosed epilepsy manage these problems. OBJECTIVES: To identify and assess possible psychological and neuropsychological interventions for adults with newly diagnosed epilepsy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases on 30 June 2015: the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid), SCOPUS, PsycINFO, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). SELECTION CRITERIA: This review includes all randomised controlled trials, quasi-randomised controlled trials, prospective cohort controlled studies, and prospective before and after studies which include psychological or neuropsychological interventions for people with newly diagnosed epilepsy. We excluded studies that included people with epilepsy and any other psychological disorder or neurological condition. We excluded studies carried out which recruited only children. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methodological procedure expected by The Cochrane Collaboration. Two authors independently completed data extraction and risk of bias analysis. The results of this were cross-checked and third author resolved any discrepancies. In the event of missing data, we contacted the study authors. Meta-analysis was not completed due to differences in the intervention and outcomes reported in the two studies. MAIN RESULTS: We included two randomised controlled trials assessing psychological interventions for people with newly diagnosed epilepsy. One study assessed a cognitive behavioural intervention (CBI) in an adolescent population. This study was rated as low quality. One study assessed a specialist nurse intervention in an adult population. This study was rating as very low quality.We rated one study as having unclear risk of bias and one study as having high risk of bias.The CBI study indicated that this intervention could significantly reduce depressive symptoms in people with subthreshold depressive disorder. However, the study assessing the effectiveness of a nurse intervention found no significant benefit for depressive symptoms,but did find that in individuals with the least knowledge of epilepsy, a nurse intervention could increase their knowledge of epilepsy scores. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Meta-analysis was not possible as we identified only two studies and they utilised different interventions and outcome measures.Previous research has highlighted the impact of psychological and neuropsychological difficulties experienced by people with epilepsy and the negative effect this has on their quality of life. The main finding of this review is that there is a paucity of research assessing possible neuropsychological and psychological interventions for adults with newly diagnosed epilepsy.

Exploring loss and replacement of loss for understanding the impacts of epilepsy onset: a qualitative investigation.

Previous research identifies loss as a key concept for our understanding of the impact of chronic illness. In this in-depth qualitative study, we explored the utility of the concept of loss and loss replacement as a means of gaining a fuller understanding of the implications of a diagnosis of epilepsy for overall quality of life (QOL). Potential participants were identified from the database of a large UK-based randomized controlled trial of antiepileptic drug treatment for new-onset epilepsy and selected using purposive sampling methods. In-depth interviews were conducted with 67 people; interview material was analyzed thematically. Our findings confirm 'loss' as a key concept in understanding epilepsy impact. Participants cited profound physical and social losses, and the links between these and psychological loss were clearly articulated. Informants described two main processes via which the linked losses they experienced occurred: personal withdrawal processes and externally enforced processes. Seizure control was integral to restoring psychological well-being and a sense of normality but was only one of a number of influences moderating the degree of loss experienced following seizure onset. Our work emphasizes that people with epilepsy (PWE) require active support for their continued engagement or reengagement in roles and activities identified as central to their psychological well-being and overall QOL. Achieving this requires a multiagency approach to drive forward key strategies for reduction of the negative impacts of epilepsy and to engender a sense of normality in the context of a condition often experienced as placing the individual outside the socially determined parameters of the 'normal'.

Executive functions and psychiatric symptoms in drug-refractory juvenile myoclonic epilepsy.

PURPOSE: The pattern of executive dysfunction reported in juvenile myoclonic epilepsy (JME) resembles that of patients with cluster B personality disorders. This study examined whether executive dysfunction and maladaptive behavior reported in patients with JME are related. METHOD: Sixty patients with drug-refractory JME were administered tests of intellect, memory, and executive dysfunction. Anxiety, depression, personality traits, impact of epilepsy, and perceived cognitive effects of antiepileptic drugs were measured. RESULTS: Half of the cohort exhibited moderate to severe anxiety symptoms. The patients performed most poorly on naming ability and inhibition switching. Duration of epilepsy exacerbated poor performance on inhibition switching. Females presented with pathological scores for neurotic and introvert traits and males for introvert traits. Abnormal personality traits and psychiatric disorders were associated with worse intellectual and executive functioning. People with extreme Eysenck Personality Scale - Brief Version (EPQ-BV) scores demonstrated the greatest level of executive impairment. Furthermore, the same degree of dysfunction was not seen in any individual with unremarkable EPQ-BV scores. CONCLUSION: This study indicates that specific patterns of executive dysfunction are related to maladaptive behavior in JME. Distinct behavioral patterns may be used to identify functional and anatomical differences between people with JME and for stratification to enable gene discovery.

A comprehensive neuropsychological description of cognition in drug-refractory juvenile myoclonic epilepsy.

The study of juvenile myoclonic epilepsy is important in that: it is common and heterogeneous; the etiology is unknown; and patients report broad cognitive problems. We utilized a broad battery of neuropsychometric tests to assess the following: intellectual function, memory, language and naming, executive function, the impact of epilepsy, and antiepilepsy drug side effects. Sixty people with drug-refractory JME were interviewed, and performance was profoundly impaired across the range of tests. Impairments included the following: full-scale IQ (89, p<0.001); processing speed (86, p<0.001); visual memory (immediate and delayed) more affected than verbal memory; verbal fluency and inhibition (p<0.001); and self-reported drug side effects (p<0.001). Eighty-three percent of patients exhibited frank executive dysfunction, which was moderate to severe in 66%. Regression modeling confirmed that an early age at onset and the need for polytherapy were associated with poorer cognitive outcomes. This study confirms previous reports of executive dysfunction in a larger cohort and with greater statistical rigor. We also identified a high prevalence of neurotoxicity symptoms such as fatigue and poorer functioning across intellectual and memory tests than had previously been reported.

National plans and awareness campaigns as priorities for achieving global brain health.

Neurological conditions are the leading cause of death and disability combined. This public health crisis has become a global priority with the introduction of WHO's Intersectoral Global Action Plan on Epilepsy and Other Neurological Disorders 2022-2031 (IGAP). 18 months after this plan was adopted, global neurology stakeholders, including representatives of the OneNeurology Partnership (a consortium uniting global neurology organisations), take stock and advocate for urgent acceleration of IGAP implementation. Drawing on lessons from relevant global health contexts, this Health Policy identifies two priority IGAP targets to expedite national delivery of the entire 10-year plan: namely, to update national policies and plans, and to create awareness campaigns and advocacy programmes for neurological conditions and brain health. To ensure rapid attainment of the identified priority targets, six strategic drivers are proposed: universal community awareness, integrated neurology approaches, intersectoral governance, regionally coordinated IGAP domestication, lived experience-informed policy making, and neurological mainstreaming (advocating to embed brain health into broader policy agendas). Contextualised with globally emerging IGAP-directed efforts and key considerations for intersectoral policy design, this novel framework provides actionable recommendations for policy makers and IGAP implementation partners. Timely, synergistic pursuit of the six drivers might aid WHO member states in cultivating public awareness and policy structures required for successful intersectoral roll-out of IGAP by 2031, paving the way towards brain health for all.

The prevalence of neurodevelopmental disorders in children prenatally exposed to antiepileptic drugs.

The aim of this study was to compare the prevalence of diagnosed neurodevelopmental disorders in children exposed, in utero, to different antiepileptic drug treatments. A prospective cohort of women with epilepsy and a control group of women without epilepsy were recruited from antenatal clinics. The children of this cohort were followed longitudinally until 6 years of age (n=415). Diagnosis of a neurodevelopmental disorder was made independently of the research team. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed an increase in risk of neurodevelopmental disorders in children exposed to monotherapy sodium valproate (VPA) (6/50, 12.0%; aOR 6.05, 95%CI 1.65 to 24.53, p=0.007) and in those exposed to polytherapy with sodium VPA (3/20, 15.0%; aOR 9.97, 95% CI 1.82 to 49.40, p=0.005) compared with control children (4/214; 1.87%). Autistic spectrum disorder was the most frequent diagnosis. No significant increase was found among children exposed to carbamazepine (1/50) or lamotrigine (2/30). An accumulation of evidence demonstrates that the risks associated with prenatal sodium VPA exposure include an increased prevalence of neurodevelopmental disorders. Whether such disorders are discrete or represent the severe end of a continuum of altered neurodevelopmental functioning requires further investigation. Replication and extension of this research is required to investigate the mechanism(s) underpinning the relationship. Finally, the increased likelihood of neurodevelopmental disorders should be communicated to women for whom sodium VPA is a treatment option.

Minimum requirements for the diagnosis of psychogenic nonepileptic seizures: a staged approach: a report from the International League Against Epilepsy Nonepileptic Seizures Task Force.

An international consensus group of clinician-researchers in epilepsy, neurology, neuropsychology, and neuropsychiatry collaborated with the aim of developing clear guidance on standards for the diagnosis of psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES). Because the gold standard of video electroencephalography (vEEG) is not available worldwide, or for every patient, the group delineated a staged approach to PNES diagnosis. Using a consensus review of the literature, this group evaluated key diagnostic approaches. These included: history, EEG, ambulatory EEG, vEEG/monitoring, neurophysiologic, neurohumoral, neuroimaging, neuropsychological testing, hypnosis, and conversation analysis. Levels of diagnostic certainty were developed including possible, probable, clinically established, and documented diagnosis, based on the availability of history, witnessed event, and investigations, including vEEG. The aim and hope of this report is to provide greater clarity about the process and certainty of the diagnosis of PNES, with the intent to improve the care for people with epilepsy and nonepileptic seizures.

Semantic memory is impaired in patients with unilateral anterior temporal lobe resection for temporal lobe epilepsy.

Contemporary clinical and basic neuroscience studies have increasingly implicated the anterior temporal lobe regions, bilaterally, in the formation of coherent concepts. Mounting convergent evidence for the importance of the anterior temporal lobe in semantic memory is found in patients with bilateral anterior temporal lobe damage (e.g. semantic dementia), functional neuroimaging and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation studies. If this proposal is correct, then one might expect patients with anterior temporal lobe resection for long-standing temporal lobe epilepsy to be semantically impaired. Such patients, however, do not present clinically with striking comprehension deficits but with amnesia and variable anomia, leading some to conclude that semantic memory is intact in resection for temporal lobe epilepsy and thus casting doubt over the conclusions drawn from semantic dementia and linked basic neuroscience studies. Whilst there is a considerable neuropsychological literature on temporal lobe epilepsy, few studies have probed semantic memory directly, with mixed results, and none have undertaken the same type of systematic investigation of semantic processing that has been conducted with other patient groups. In this study, therefore, we investigated the semantic performance of 20 patients with resection for chronic temporal lobe epilepsy with a full battery of semantic assessments, including more sensitive measures of semantic processing. The results provide a bridge between the current clinical observations about resection for temporal lobe epilepsy and the expectations from semantic dementia and other neuroscience findings. Specifically, we found that on simple semantic tasks, the patients' accuracy fell in the normal range, with the exception that some patients with left resection for temporal lobe epilepsy had measurable anomia. Once the semantic assessments were made more challenging, by probing specific-level concepts, lower frequency/more abstract items or measuring reaction times on semantic tasks versus those on difficulty-matched non-semantic assessments, evidence of a semantic impairment was found in all individuals. We conclude by describing a unified, computationally inspired framework for capturing the variable degrees of semantic impairment found across different patient groups (semantic dementia, temporal lobe epilepsy, glioma and stroke) as well as semantic processing in neurologically intact participants.