Prednisolone or tetracosactide depot for infantile epileptic spasms syndrome? A prospective analysis of data embedded within two randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To report a prospectively planned analysis of two randomised controlled trials with embedded comparisons of prednisolone versus tetracosactide depot for the treatment of infantile epileptic spasms syndrome (IESS). METHODS: Individual patient data from patients randomly allocated to prednisolone or tetracosactide depot were analysed from two trials (UKISS, ICISS). The comparison was embedded within trials in which some patients also received vigabatrin but only patients receiving monotherapy with randomly allocated hormonal treatments are included in this analysis. The main outcome was cessation of spasms (Days 13-14 after randomisation). Lead time to treatment and underlying aetiology were taken into account. Cessation of spasms on Days 14-42 inclusive, electroclinical response (EEG Day 14), plus developmental and epilepsy outcomes (at 14 months in UKISS and 18 months in ICISS) are also reported. Minimum treatment was prednisolone 40 mg per day for two weeks or tetracosactide depot 0·5 mg IM on alternate days for two weeks, all followed by a reducing dose of prednisolone over two weeks. RESULTS: 126 infants were included in this study. On tetracosactide depot, 47 of 62 (76%) were free of spasms on Days 13-14 compared to 43 of 64 (67%) on prednisolone (difference 9%, 95% CI -7·2% to +25·2%, chi square 1·15, p = 0·28). For Day 14-42 cessation of spasms, on tetracosactide depot, 41 of 61 (67%) were free of spasms compared to 35 of 62 (56%) on prednisolone (difference 11%, 95% CI -6·4% to +28·4%, chi square 1·51, p = 0·22). There was no significant difference in mean VABS score between infants who received prednisolone compared with those who received tetracosactide depot (74·8 (SD 18·3) versus 78·0 (SD 20·2) t = -0·91 p = 0·36). The proportion with ongoing epilepsy at the time of developmental assessment was 20 of 61 (33%) in the tetracosactide group compared with 26 out of 63 (41%) in the prednisolone group (difference 8%, 95% CI -9·2% to +25·2%, Chi [2] 0·95, p = 0·33). SIGNIFICANCE: With hormone monotherapy, either prednisolone or tetracosactide depot may be recommended for infantile epileptic spasms syndrome.

Vigabatrin with hormonal treatment versus hormonal treatment alone (ICISS) for infantile spasms: 18-month outcomes of an open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Infantile spasms constitute a severe form of epileptic encephalopathy. In the International Collaborative Infantile Spasms Study (ICISS), we showed that combining vigabatrin with hormonal therapy was more effective than hormonal therapy alone at stopping spasms between days 14 and 42 of treatment. In this planned follow-up, we aimed to assess whether combination therapy was associated with improved developmental and epilepsy outcomes at 18 months of age. METHODS: In ICISS, a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial, infants were enrolled from 102 hospitals (three in Australia, 11 in Germany, two in New Zealand, three in Switzerland, and 83 in the UK). Eligible infants had a clinical diagnosis of infantile spasms and a hypsarrhythmic (or similar) electroencephalogram (EEG) no more than 7 days before enrolment. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) by a secure website to receive hormonal therapy with vigabatrin or hormonal therapy alone. If parents consented, there was an additional randomisation (1:1) of type of hormonal therapy used (prednisolone or tetracosactide depot). Block randomisation was stratified for hormonal treatment and risk of developmental impairment. Parents and clinicians were not masked to therapy, but investigators assessing epilepsy and developmental outcomes at 18 months were masked to treatment allocation. Minimum doses were oral prednisolone 10 mg four times a day or intramuscular tetracosactide depot 0·5 mg (40 IU) on alternate days with or without oral vigabatrin 100 mg/kg per day. The primary outcome at 18 months was development as assessed by the Vineland Adaptive Behaviour Scales (VABS) composite score. Secondary outcomes were the presence or absence of epileptic seizures or infantile spasms in the previous 28 days, as recorded by parents and carers, and the use of any anti-epileptic treatment (including ketogenic diet) in the previous 28 days. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number 54363174, and EudraCT, number 2006-000788-27. FINDINGS: Between March 7, 2007, and May 22, 2014, 766 infants were screened and, of those, 377 were randomly assigned to hormonal therapy with vigabatrin (n=186) or hormonal therapy alone (n=191). 362 infants were assessed for developmental and epilepsy outcomes at 18 months, 181 in each treatment group. Mean VABS scores did not differ significantly between the combination therapy group and the hormonal therapy alone group (73·9 [SE 1·3] vs 72·7 [1·4], difference -1·2 [95% CI -4·9 to 2·6], p=0·55). Presence of epilepsy at the assessment at age 18 months was similar in both treatment groups (54 [30·0%] of 180 infants who received combination therapy vs 52 [29·2%] of 178 who received hormonal therapy alone; difference 0·8% [95% CI -8·8 to 10·4], p=0·90). Presence of spasms was also similar in both treatment groups (27 [15·0%] of 180 infants on combination therapy vs 28 [15·7%] of 178 on hormonal therapy alone; difference 0·7% [95% CI -6·9 to 8·3], p=0·85). At the 18-month assessment, 158 (44·1%) of 358 infants were on some form of anti-epileptic treatment. Initial control of spasms between days 14 and 42 of treatment was associated with higher mean VABS scores at 18 months (79·1 [SE 1·2] vs 63·2 [1·1], difference 15·9 [95% CI 12·4 to 19·5], p<0·001) and with higher likelihood of absence of seizures at 18 months (in 39 [17·0%] of 229 infants who achieved spasm cessation vs 67 [51·9%] of 129 who did not; difference 34·9% [24·8 to 45·0], p<0·001). Increasing lead-time to treatment was associated with lower VABS scores (analysis of variance: F[4,354]=6·38, p<0·001) and worse epilepsy outcomes (p=0·023). INTERPRETATION: Combination therapy did not result in improved developmental or epilepsy outcomes at 18 months. However, early clinical response to treatment was associated with improved developmental and epilepsy outcomes at 18 months. Longer lead-time to treatment was associated with poorer outcomes. Rapid diagnosis and effective treatment of infantile spasms could therefore improve outcomes. FUNDING: The Castang Foundation, Bath Unit for Research in Paediatrics, National Institute of Health Research, the Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, BRONNER-BENDER Stiftung/Gernsbach, University Children's Hospital Zurich.

Safety and effectiveness of hormonal treatment versus hormonal treatment with vigabatrin for infantile spasms (ICISS): a randomised, multicentre, open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: Infantile spasms constitutes a severe infantile epilepsy syndrome that is difficult to treat and has a high morbidity. Hormonal therapies or vigabatrin are the most commonly used treatments. We aimed to assess whether combining the treatments would be more effective than hormonal therapy alone. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label randomised trial, 102 hospitals (Australia [three], Germany [11], New Zealand [two], Switzerland [three], and the UK [83]) enrolled infants who had a clinical diagnosis of infantile spasms and a hypsarrhythmic (or similar) EEG no more than 7 days before enrolment. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) by a secure website to receive hormonal therapy with vigabatrin or hormonal therapy alone. If parents consented, there was an additional randomisation (1:1) of type of hormonal therapy used (prednisolone or tetracosactide depot). Block randomisation was stratified for hormonal treatment and risk of developmental impairment. Parents and clinicians were not masked to therapy, but investigators assessing electro-clinical outcome were masked to treatment allocation. Minimum doses were prednisolone 10 mg four times a day or intramuscular tetracosactide depot 0·5 mg (40 IU) on alternate days with or without vigabatrin 100 mg/kg per day. The primary outcome was cessation of spasms, which was defined as no witnessed spasms on and between day 14 and day 42 from trial entry, as recorded by parents and carers in a seizure diary. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with The International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN), number 54363174, and the European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials (EUDRACT), number 2006-000788-27. FINDINGS: Between March 7, 2007, and May 22, 2014, 766 infants were screened and, of those, 377 were randomly assigned to hormonal therapy with vigabatrin (186) or hormonal therapy alone (191). All 377 infants were assessed for the primary outcome. Between days 14 and 42 inclusive no spasms were witnessed in 133 (72%) of 186 patients on hormonal therapy with vigabatrin compared with 108 (57%) of 191 patients on hormonal therapy alone (difference 15·0%, 95% CI 5·1-24·9, p=0·002). Serious adverse reactions necessitating hospitalisation occurred in 33 infants (16 on hormonal therapy alone and 17 on hormonal therapy with vigabatrin). The most common serious adverse reaction was infection occurring in five infants on hormonal therapy alone and four on hormonal therapy with vigabatrin. There were no deaths attributable to treatment. INTERPRETATION: Hormonal therapy with vigabatrin is significantly more effective at stopping infantile spasms than hormonal therapy alone. The 4 week period of spasm cessation required to achieve a primary clinical response to treatment suggests that the effect seen might be sustained, but this needs to be confirmed at the 18 month follow-up. FUNDING: The Castang Foundation, Bath Unit for Research in Paediatrics, National Institute of Health Research, the Royal United Hospitals Bath NHS Foundation Trust, the BRONNER-BENDUNG Stifung/Gernsbach, and University Children's Hospital Zurich.

Cognitive outcome in children with rhombencephalosynapsis.

PURPOSE: Rhombencephalosynapsis is a rare congenital cerebellar malformation increasingly recognized by prenatal and neonatal neuroimaging. Cognitive outcome seems to be variable but is not well documented. AIMS AND METHODS: To study neurological, behavioural, and cognitive functions of patients with non-syndromic rhombencephalosynapsis, five patients (three female and two male, mean age at the time of this study 8.9 years, range 4.3-17.3 years) were assessed by neurological examination and several tests of behaviour and cognitive functions. RESULTS: Ataxia was present in all patients, but daily life activities were partly restricted in only one. Other symptoms were muscular hypotonia, abnormal eye movements, and head stereotypies. Three patients had pathological scores on both attention and hyperactivity/impulsivity scales. Only two patients had normal full-scale IQ (IQ value of 109 and 114, respectively). Verbal and/or performance IQ were impaired in three. CONCLUSION: In non-syndromic rhombencephalosynapsis the clinical presentation is variable. Attention deficit and hyperactivity disorders are frequent behavioural problems. Cognitive functions are mostly impaired, as mild intellectual impairment without a typical cognitive profile. However, rhombencephalosynapsis is compatible with normal cognitive functions. No definitive correlation between cognitive impairment and additional supratentorial abnormalities could be established.

Gomez-Lopez-Hernandez syndrome: an easily missed diagnosis.

Gomez-Lopez-Hernandez syndrome (GLHS) is a rare syndrome comprising the triad rhombencephalosynapsis (RS), parietal alopecia, and trigeminal anesthesia. Other typical findings are skull abnormalities, craniofacial dysmorphic signs, and short stature. Intellectual impairment is typical but cases with normal cognitive functions have also been reported. Only 15 cases of GLHS have been described so far, all sporadic. We report four further patients with GLHS: one neonate, two children and a middle aged man. In all cases the diagnosis was made only in retrospect; one child died as neonate due to esophageal atresia. All patients presented RS and parietal alopecia, three intermittent head stereotypies, two had obvious trigeminal anesthesia, and one normal cognition. Alopecia and also trigeminal anesthesia can be very mild and can be easily missed. However, the dysmorphic signs including bilateral alopecia are already present in the neonatal period and are highly suggestive of GLHS. RS should be looked for in this situation. It is important to mention that neuroimaging does not allow distinguishing between isolated RS and GLHS. If RS is diagnosed the clinical signs of GLHS should be sought. The diagnosis of GLHS can only be made by the combination of the typical dysmorphic signs and neuroimaging in the neonatal period, but not prenatally.