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

BACKGROUND: This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review first published in 2011, and most recently updated in 2019. Epilepsy is a chronic and disabling neurological disorder, affecting approximately 1% of the population. Up to 30% of people with epilepsy have seizures that are resistant to currently available antiepileptic drugs and require treatment with multiple antiepileptic drugs in combination. Felbamate is a second-generation antiepileptic drug that can be used as add-on therapy to standard antiepileptic drugs. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of felbamate versus placebo when used as an add-on treatment for people with drug-resistant focal-onset epilepsy. SEARCH METHODS: For the latest update, we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 13 July 2021) on 15 July 2021. There were no language or time restrictions. We reviewed the reference lists of retrieved studies to search for additional reports of relevant studies. We also contacted the manufacturers of felbamate and experts in the field for information about any unpublished or ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised placebo-controlled add-on studies of people of any age with drug-resistant focal seizures. The studies could be double-blind, single-blind or unblinded and could be of parallel-group or cross-over design. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted information. In the case of disagreements, a third review author arbitrated. Review authors assessed the following outcomes: 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency; absolute or percentage reduction in seizure frequency; treatment withdrawal; adverse effects; quality of life. MAIN RESULTS: We included four randomised controlled trials, representing a total of 236 participants, in the review. Two trials had parallel-group design, the third had a two-period cross-over design, and the fourth had a three-period cross-over design. We judged all four studies to be at an unclear risk of bias overall. Bias arose from the incomplete reporting of methodological details, the incomplete and selective reporting of outcome data, and from participants having unstable drug regimens during experimental treatment in one trial. Due to significant methodological heterogeneity, clinical heterogeneity and differences in outcome measures, it was not possible to perform a meta-analysis of the extracted data. Only one study reported the outcome of 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency, whilst three studies reported percentage reduction in seizure frequency compared to placebo. One study claimed an average seizure reduction of 35.8% with add-on felbamate whilst another study claimed a more modest reduction of 4.2%. Both studies reported that seizure frequency increased with add-on placebo and that there was a significant difference in seizure reduction between felbamate and placebo (P = 0.0005 and P = 0.018, respectively). The third study reported a 14% reduction in seizure frequency with add-on felbamate but stated that the difference between treatments was not significant. There were conflicting results regarding treatment withdrawal. One study reported a higher treatment withdrawal for placebo-randomised participants, whereas the other three studies reported higher treatment withdrawal rates for felbamate-randomised participants. Notably, the treatment withdrawal rates for felbamate treatment groups across all four studies remained reasonably low (less than 10%), suggesting that felbamate may be well tolerated. Felbamate-randomised participants most commonly withdrew from treatment due to adverse effects. The adverse effects consistently reported by all four studies were headache, dizziness and nausea. All three adverse effects were reported by 23% to 40% of felbamate-treated participants versus 3% to 15% of placebo-treated participants. We assessed the evidence for all outcomes using GRADE and rated the evidence as very low certainty, meaning that we have little confidence in the findings reported. We mainly downgraded evidence for imprecision due to the narrative synthesis conducted and the low number of events. We stress that the true effect of felbamate could likely be significantly different from that reported in this current review update. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In view of the methodological deficiencies, the limited number of included studies and the differences in outcome measures, we have found no reliable evidence to support the use of felbamate as an add-on therapy in people with drug-resistant focal-onset epilepsy. A large-scale, randomised controlled trial conducted over a longer period of time is required to inform clinical practice.

Intravenous immunoglobulins for epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: Epilepsy is a common neurological condition, with an estimated incidence of 50 per 100,000 persons. People with epilepsy may present with various types of immunological abnormalities, such as low serum immunoglobulin A (IgA) levels, lack of the immunoglobulin G (IgG) subclass and identification of certain types of antibodies. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) treatment may represent a valuable approach and its efficacy has important implications for epilepsy management. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2011 and last updated in 2017. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effects of IVIg on the frequency and duration of seizures, quality of life and adverse effects when used as monotherapy or as add-on treatment for people with epilepsy. SEARCH METHODS: For the latest update, we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) (20 December 2018), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 20 December 2018), Web of Science (1898 to 20 December 2018), ISRCTN registry (20 December 2018), WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP, 20 December 2018), the US National Institutes of Health ClinicalTrials.gov (20 December 2018), and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of IVIg as monotherapy or add-on treatment in people with epilepsy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the trials for inclusion and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. Outcomes included percentage of people rendered seizure-free, 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency, adverse effects, treatment withdrawal and quality of life. MAIN RESULTS: We included one study (61 participants). The included study was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial which compared the treatment efficacy of IVIg as an add-on with a placebo add-on in patients with drug-resistant epilepsy. Seizure freedom was not reported in the study. There was no significant difference between IVIg and placebo in 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency (RR 1.89, 95% CI 0.85 to 4.21; one study, 58 participants; low-certainty evidence). The study reported a statistically significant effect for global assessment in favour of IVIg (RR 3.29, 95% CI 1.13 to 9.57; one study, 60 participants; low-certainty evidence). No adverse effects were demonstrated. We found no randomised controlled trials that investigated the effects of IVIg monotherapy for epilepsy. Overall, the included study was rated at low to unclear risk of bias. Using GRADE methodology, the certainty of the evidence was rated as low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We cannot draw any reliable conclusions regarding the efficacy of IVIg as a treatment for epilepsy. Further randomised controlled trials are needed.

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

BACKGROUND: This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review previously published in 2017.Epilepsy is a chronic and disabling neurological disorder, affecting approximately 1% of the population. Up to 30% of people with epilepsy have seizures that are resistant to currently available antiepileptic drugs and require treatment with multiple antiepileptic drugs in combination. Felbamate is a second-generation antiepileptic drug that can be used as add-on therapy to standard antiepileptic drugs. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of felbamate versus placebo when used as an add-on treatment for people with drug-resistant focal-onset epilepsy. SEARCH METHODS: For the latest update we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), on 18 December 2018. There were no language or time restrictions. We reviewed the reference lists of retrieved studies to search for additional reports of relevant studies. We also contacted the manufacturers of felbamate and experts in the field for information about any unpublished or ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised placebo-controlled add-on studies of people of any age with drug-resistant focal seizures. The studies could be double-blind, single-blind or unblinded and could be of parallel-group or cross-over design. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted information. In the case of disagreements, the third review author arbitrated. Review authors assessed the following outcomes: 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency; absolute or percentage reduction in seizure frequency; treatment withdrawal; adverse effects; quality of life. MAIN RESULTS: We included four randomised controlled trials, representing a total of 236 participants, in the review. Two trials had parallel-group design, the third had a two-period cross-over design, and the fourth had a three-period cross-over design. We judged all four studies to be at an unclear risk of bias overall. Bias arose from the incomplete reporting of methodological details, the incomplete and selective reporting of outcome data, and from participants having unstable drug regimens during experimental treatment in one trial. Due to significant methodological heterogeneity, clinical heterogeneity and differences in outcome measures, it was not possible to perform a meta-analysis of the extracted data.Only one study reported the outcome, 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency, whilst three studies reported percentage reduction in seizure frequency compared to placebo. One study claimed an average seizure reduction of 35.8% with add-on felbamate while another study claimed a more modest reduction of 4.2%. Both studies reported that seizure frequency increased with add-on placebo and that there was a significant difference in seizure reduction between felbamate and placebo (P = 0.0005 and P = 0.018, respectively). The third study reported a 14% reduction in seizure frequency with add-on felbamate but stated that the difference between treatments was not significant. There were conflicting results regarding treatment withdrawal. One study reported a higher treatment withdrawal for placebo-randomised participants, whereas the other three studies reported higher treatment withdrawal rates for felbamate-randomised participants. Notably, the treatment withdrawal rates for felbamate treatment groups across all four studies remained reasonably low (less than 10%), suggesting that felbamate may be well tolerated. Felbamate-randomised participants most commonly withdrew from treatment due to adverse effects. The adverse effects consistently reported by all four studies were: headache, dizziness and nausea. All three adverse effects were reported by 23% to 40% of felbamate-treated participants versus 3% to 15% of placebo-treated participants.We assessed the evidence for all outcomes using GRADE and found it as being very-low certainty, meaning that we have little confidence in the findings reported. We mainly downgraded evidence for imprecision due to the narrative synthesis conducted and the low number of events. We stress that the true effect of felbamate could likely be significantly different from that reported in this current review update. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In view of the methodological deficiencies, the limited number of included studies and the differences in outcome measures, we have found no reliable evidence to support the use of felbamate as an add-on therapy in people with drug-resistant focal-onset epilepsy. A large-scale, randomised controlled trial conducted over a longer period of time is required to inform clinical practice.

Intravenous immunoglobulins for epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: Epilepsy is a common neurological condition, with an estimated incidence of 50 per 100,000 persons. People with epilepsy may present with various types of immunological abnormalities, such as low serum immunoglobulin A (IgA) levels, lack of the immunoglobulin G (IgG) subclass and identification of certain types of antibodies. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) treatment may represent a valuable approach and its efficacy has important implications for epilepsy management. This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 1, 2011. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effects of IVIg on the frequency and duration of seizures, quality of life and adverse effects when used as monotherapy or as add-on treatment for people with epilepsy. SEARCH METHODS: For the latest update, we searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (2 February 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online (2 February 2017), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 2 February 2017), Web of Science (1898 to 2 February 2017), ISRCTN registry (2 February 2017), WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP, 2 February 2017), the US National Institutes of Health ClinicalTrials.gov (2 February 2017), and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials of IVIg as monotherapy or add-on treatment in people with epilepsy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the trials for inclusion and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. Outcomes included percentage of people rendered seizure-free, 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency, adverse effects, treatment withdrawal and quality of life. MAIN RESULTS: We included one study (61 participants). The included study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-centre trial which compared the treatment efficacy of IVIg as an add-on with a placebo add-on in patients with refractory epilepsy. There was no significant difference between IVIg and placebo in 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency. The study reported a statistically significant effect for global assessment in favour of IVIg. No adverse effects were demonstrated. We found no randomized controlled trials that investigated the effects of IVIg monotherapy for epilepsy. Overall, the included study was rated as low/unclear risk of bias. Using GRADE methodology, the quality of the evidence was rated as low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We cannot draw any reliable conclusions regarding the efficacy of IVIg as a treatment for epilepsy. Further randomized controlled trials are needed.

Felbamate as an add-on therapy for refractory partial epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: This review is an update of a previously published review in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Issue 7, 2014) on 'Felbamate as an add-on therapy for refractory epilepsy'. Epilepsy is a chronic and disabling neurologic disorder, affecting approximately 1% of the population. Up to 30% of people with epilepsy have seizures that are resistant to currently available drugs. Felbamate is one of the second-generation antiepileptic drugs and we have assessed its effects as an add-on therapy to standard drugs in this review. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of felbamate versus placebo when used as an add-on treatment for people with refractory partial-onset epilepsy. SEARCH METHODS: For the latest update we searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, up to 20 October 2016. There were no language and time restrictions. We reviewed the reference lists of retrieved studies to search for additional reports of relevant studies. We also contacted the manufacturers of felbamate and experts in the field for information about any unpublished or ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised placebo-controlled add-on studies of people of any age with refractory partial-onset seizures. The studies could be double-blind, single-blind or unblinded and could be of parallel or cross-over design. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted information. We resolved disagreements by discussion. If disagreements persisted, the third review author arbitrated. We assessed the following outcomes: 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency; absolute or percentage reduction in seizure frequency; treatment withdrawal; adverse effects; quality of life. MAIN RESULTS: We included four randomised controlled trials with a total of 236 participants. Two trials were parallel design, the third had a two-period cross-over design, and the fourth had a three-period cross-over design. Two studies were at an unclear risk of bias for random sequence generation and allocation concealment. These two studies did not include any description of their methods for outcome assessment and performance blinding (i.e. participants or doctors). Two studies were at high risk of bias for incomplete outcome data. Due to significant methodological heterogeneity, clinical heterogeneity and differences in outcome measures, it was not possible to perform a meta-analysis of the results. Only one study reported 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency. One study reported absolute and percentage reduction in seizure frequency compared to placebo, P values were 0.046 and 0.018, respectively. One study reported percentage reduction in seizure frequency compared to placebo, but there were no P values. Adverse effects rates were higher during the felbamate period than the placebo period, particularly headache, nausea and dizziness. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In view of the methodological deficiencies, limited number of individual studies and differences in outcome measures, we have found no reliable evidence to support the use of felbamate as an add-on therapy in people with refractory partial-onset epilepsy. A large-scale, randomised controlled trial conducted over a longer period of time is required to inform clinical practice.

Felbamate as an add-on therapy for refractory epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: This review is an update of a previously published review in The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Issue 1, 2011) on 'Felbamate as an add-on therapy for refractory epilepsy'. Epilepsy is a chronic and disabling neurologic disorder, affecting approximately 1% of the population. Up to 30% of people with epilepsy have seizures that are resistant to currently available drugs. Felbamate is one of the second-generation antiepileptic drugs and its effects as an add-on therapy to standard drugs are assessed in this review. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of felbamate versus placebo when used as an add-on treatment for people with refractory partial-onset epilepsy. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (24 July 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL 2013, Issue 6), and PubMed (24 July 2013). This search was run for the original review on 20 May 2010. There were no language and time restrictions. We reviewed the reference lists of retrieved studies to search for additional reports of relevant studies. We also contacted the manufacturers of felbamate and experts in the field for information about any unpublished or ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized placebo-controlled add-on studies of people of any age with refractory partial-onset seizures. The studies could be double-blind, single-blind or unblinded and could be of parallel or crossover design. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted information. We resolved disagreements by discussion. If disagreements persisted, the third review author arbitrated. We assessed the following outcomes: 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency; absolute or percentage reduction in seizure frequency; treatment withdrawal; adverse effects; quality of life. MAIN RESULTS: Three randomised controlled trials with a total of 153 participants were included. The first was a parallel design, the second had a two-period crossover design, and the third had a three-period crossover design. One study was at unclear risk of bias for random sequence generation and allocation concealment. And in the same study, there was no description of how to blind outcome assessment, performance blinding was for participants, might not be for doctors. Two studies were at high risk of bias for incomplete outcome data. Due to significant methodological heterogeneity, clinical heterogeneity and differences in outcome measures, it was not possible to perform a meta-analysis of the results. None of the three studies reported 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency. Only one study reported absolute and percentage reduction in seizure frequency compared to placebo, P values were 0.046 and 0.018, respectively. Adverse effects rates were higher during the felbamate period than the placebo period, particularly headache, nausea and dizziness. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In view of the methodological deficiencies, limited number of individual studies and differences in outcome measure, we have found no reliable evidence to support the use of felbamate as an add-on therapy in patients with refractory partial-onset epilepsy. A large-scale, randomised controlled trial conducted over a longer period of time is required to inform clinical practice.Since the last version of this review no new studies have been found.

Felbamate as an add-on therapy for refractory epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: Epilepsy is a chronic and disabling neurologic disorder, affecting approximately one per cent of the population. Up to 30% of people with epilepsy have seizures that are resistant to currently available drugs. Felbamate is one of the second generation antiepileptic drugs and its effects as an add-on therapy to standard drugs are assessed in this review. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of felbamate versus placebo when used as an add-on treatment for people with refractory partial-onset epilepsy. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (6 December 2010), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, 6 December 2010), and PubMed (6 December 2010). There were no language restrictions. We reviewed the reference lists of retrieved studies to search for additional reports of relevant studies. We also contacted the manufacturers of felbamate and experts in the field for information about any unpublished or ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized placebo-controlled add-on studies of people of any age with refractory partial-onset seizures. The studies could be double-blind, single-blind or unblinded and could be of parallel or crossover design. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion and extracted information. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. If disagreements persisted, the third review author arbitrated. The following outcomes were assessed: 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency; absolute or percentage reduction in seizure frequency; treatment withdrawal; adverse effects; quality of life. MAIN RESULTS: Three randomized controlled trials were included. The first was a parallel design, the second was a two-period crossover design, and the third was a three-period crossover design. Due to significant methodological heterogeneity, clinical heterogeneity and differences in outcome measures, it was not possible to perform a meta-analysis of the results. None of the three studies reported 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency. Only one study reported absolute and percentage reduction in seizure frequency compared to placebo, P values were 0.046 and 0.018, respectively. Adverse effects rates were higher during the felbamate period than the placebo period, particularly headache, nausea and dizziness. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In view of the methodological deficiencies, limited number of individual studies and differences in outcome measure, we have found no reliable evidence to support the use of felbamate as an add-on therapy in patients with refractory partial-onset epilepsy. A large scale, randomized controlled trial conducted over a greater period of time is required to inform clinical practice.

Intravenous immunoglobulins for epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: Epilepsy is a common neurological condition, with an estimated incidence of 50 per 100,000 persons. People with epilepsy may present with various types of immunological abnormalities, such as low serum IgA level, lack of IgG subclass and identification of certain types of antibodies. Intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) treatment may represent a valuable approach and its efficacy has important implications for epilepsy management. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effects of IVIg on the frequency and duration of seizures, quality of life and adverse effects, when used as monotherapy or as add-on treatment for people with epilepsy. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register (14 June 2010), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Issue 2 of 4, The Cochrane Library, 2010), MEDLINE (1950 to June 2010), Web of Science (14 June 2010), Current Controlled Trials (11 June 2010), the National Research Register (NRR) archive (11 June 2010), the US National Institutes of Health (Clinicaltrials.gov) (11 June 2010) and reference lists of articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials of IVIg as monotherapy or add-on treatment in people with epilepsy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed the trials for inclusion and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. Outcomes included percentage of people rendered seizure-free, 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency, adverse effects, treatment withdrawal and quality of life. MAIN RESULTS: We included one study (61 patients). We found no randomized controlled trials that investigated the effects of IVIg monotherapy for epilepsy. The included study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-center trial which compared the treatment efficacy of IVIg as an add-on with a placebo add-on in patients with refractory epilepsy. There was no significant difference between IVIg and placebo in 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency. The study reported a statistically significant effect for global assessment in favor of IVIg. No adverse effects were demonstrated. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No reliable conclusions can be drawn regarding the efficacy of IVIg as a treatment for epilepsy. Further randomized controlled trials are needed.

Ginseng for cognition.

BACKGROUND: Ginseng is a herbal medicine in widespread use throughout the world. Its effect on the brain and nervous system has been investigated. It has been suggested, on the basis of both laboratory and clinical studies, that it may have beneficial effects on cognitive performance. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and adverse effects of ginseng given to improve cognitive performance in healthy participants, participants with cognitive impairment or dementia.To highlight the quality and quantity of research evidence available. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Specialized Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (CDCIG), The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS, clinical trials registries and grey literature sources were searched on 24 February 2009 using the following terms: ginseng* OR panax OR ginsan OR "Jen Shen"OR shinseng OR Renshen OR schinseng OR ninjin OR gingilone OR panaxoside* OR ginsenoside* OR protopanaxa* OR protopanaxadiol OR protopanaxatriol OR panaxagin OR ginsenol OR ginsenine and terms for dementia and cognition. The CDCIG Specialized Register contains records from all major health care databases (The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS) as well as from many clinical trials registries and grey literature sources. SELECTION CRITERIA: All double-blind and single-blind randomized, placebo controlled trials assessing the effects of ginseng on cognitive function were eligible for inclusion. Interventions were considered to be ginseng if they were compounds containing ginseng or active agents of the Panax genus as the major component. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Characteristics of each included trial were extracted independently by two reviewers using a self-developed data extraction form and entered into RevMan 5.0 software. Authors of identified trials were contacted for additional information and unpublished data. The effects of ginseng in healthy participants, participants with cognitive impairment or dementia were addressed independently. MAIN RESULTS: Nine randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled trials meeting the inclusion criteria were identified. Eight trials enrolled healthy participants, and one was of subjects with age-associated memory impairment (AAMI).Only five of the identified trials had extractable information and were included in the analysis. Four studies investigated the effects of ginseng extract and one assessed the efficacy of ginseng compound HT008-1. All of these trials investigated the effects of ginseng on healthy participants. Pooling the data was impossible owing to heterogeneity in outcome measures, trial duration, and ginseng dosage. Results of the analysis suggested improvement of some aspects of cognitive function, behavior and quality of life. No serious adverse events associated with ginseng were found. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Currently, there is a lack of convincing evidence to show a cognitive enhancing effect of Panax ginseng in healthy participants and no high quality evidence about its efficacy in patients with dementia. Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group trials with large sample sizes are needed to further investigate the effect of ginseng on cognition in different populations, including dementia patients.

Expression of trophinin and bystin identifies distinct cell types in the germinal zones of adult rat brain.

In the adult brain, the subventricular zone (SVZ) is one of the regions where active neurogenesis occurs. Relatively few specific markers are available to distinguish different types of cells in the SVZ and rostral migratory stream (RMS) of adult brain. Here, we showed that trophinin and bystin, both of which are required for early embryo implantation during development, were expressed in the SVZ and RMS of the adult rat brain, but not in the brain of embryos and early postnatal animals. Trophinin-expressing cells were immunopositive for both Ki-67 and nestin in the SVZ. Some of the trophinin-positive cells did not express either the type A cell marker polysialylated weakly adhesive form of the neural cell adhesion molecule (PSA-NCAM) or the type B cell marker glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP). Double-label immunohistochemistry revealed that bystin-positive cells co-expressed GFAP, Ki-67 and nestin, but not PSA-NCAM, suggesting that they are likely type B cells. Intracerebroventricular infusion of cytosine-beta-d-arabiofuranoside (Ara-C) eliminated trophinin-positive cells in the SVZ. Following its depletion, however, the remaining bystin-positive cells continued to divide and generate actively dividing trophinin-positive cells that were negative for PSA-NCAM, leading to reconstruction of SVZ network. These characteristics indicate that this subset of trophinin-positive cells in the SVZ is type C cells. Conversely in the RMS, trophinin co-localized with nestin and PSA-NCAM, suggesting that it is expressed in neuroblasts. Cultured neural precursor cells derived from the adult SVZ also expressed both trophinin and bystin. These findings provide insight into the molecular basis of adult neurogenesis in the SVZ and RMS.

Bystin as a novel marker for reactive astrocytes in the adult rat brain following injury.

Bystin has been identified as a protein which mediates cellular interactions between trophoblastic and endometrial epithelial cells by forming complexes with two partners, trophinin and tastin, during embryo implantation. However, the presence of bystin in the central nervous system has not been demonstrated. Here, we report the cloning of the full-length cDNA of the rat bystin gene from adult brain. Immunohistochemical and RT-PCR analysis showed that the levels of bystin expression were markedly up-regulated in the both 6-hydrodopamine-lesioned rat nigrostriatum and stab-lesioned cerebral cortex in adult rats. Double immunofluorescence staining revealed that most bystin-expressing glial cells were astrocytes (immature or mature). To determine the mechanisms for the up-regulation of bystin expression in glial cells, primary cultures of postnatal cortical astrocytes were employed. Western blot analysis showed that the expression of bystin was elevated by treatment with pro-inflammatory mediators lipopolysaccharide and interleukin-1 beta. Nerve growth factor known to be released after brain injury also induced bystin expression in the cultures. Exposure of astrocyte cultures to the differentiating agent forskolin resulted in up-regulation of bystin followed by a pronounced astrocytic stellation. The results suggest that the injury in the adult brain induces spatiotemporal up-regulation of bystin and it could be influenced, at least in part, by elevation of intracellular cAMP level. Bystin expressed by reactive astrocytes may be involved in their differentiation during the inflammatory processes following brain injury. The reappearance of bystin may also indicate that some reactive astrocytes have the capacity to recapitulate early developmental stages.