Prospective multicenter study of continuous tonic-clonic seizure monitoring on Apple Watch in epilepsy monitoring units and ambulatory environments.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the performance of a custom application developed for tonic-clonic seizure (TCS) monitoring on a consumer-wearable (Apple Watch) device. METHODS: Participants with a history of convulsive epileptic seizures were recruited for either Epilepsy Monitoring Unit (EMU) or ambulatory (AMB) monitoring; participants without epilepsy (normal controls [NC]) were also enrolled in the AMB group. Both EMU and AMB participants wore an Apple Watch with a research app that continuously recorded accelerometer and photoplethysmography (PPG) signals, and ran a fixed-and-frozen tonic-clonic seizure detection algorithm during the testing period. This algorithm had been previously developed and validated using a separate training dataset. All EMU convulsive events were validated by video-electroencephalography (video-EEG); AMB events were validated by caregiver reporting and follow-ups. Device performance was characterized and compared to prior monitoring devices through sensitivity, false alarm rate (FAR; false-alarms per 24 h), precision, and detection delay (latency). RESULTS: The EMU group had 85 participants (4,279 h, 19 TCS from 15 participants) enrolled across four EMUs; the AMB group had 21 participants (13 outpatient, 8 NC, 6,735 h, 10 TCS from 3 participants). All but one AMB participant completed the study. Device performance in the EMU group included a sensitivity of 100 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 79-100 %]; an FAR of 0.05 [0.02, 0.08] per 24 h; a precision of 68 % [48 %, 83 %]; and a latency of 32.07 s [standard deviation (std) 10.22 s]. The AMB group had a sensitivity of 100 % [66-100 %]; an FAR of 0.13 [0.08, 0.24] per 24 h; a precision of 22 % [11 %, 37 %]; and a latency of 37.38 s [13.24 s]. Notably, a single AMB participant was responsible for 8 of 31 false alarms. The AMB FAR excluding this participant was 0.10 [0.07, 0.14] per 24 h. DISCUSSION: This study demonstrates the practicability of TCS monitoring on a popular consumer wearable (Apple Watch) in daily use for people with epilepsy. The monitoring app had a high sensitivity and a substantially lower FAR than previously reported in both EMU and AMB environments.

Cognitive and psychiatric adverse events during adjunctive cenobamate treatment in phase 2 and phase 3 clinical studies.

OBJECTIVE: Cognitive and psychiatric adverse events in patients with epilepsy are important determinants of therapeutic outcomes and patient quality of life. We assessed the relationship between adjunctive cenobamate treatment and selected cognitive and psychiatric treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in adults with uncontrolled focal epilepsy. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of pooled populations of patients with focal epilepsy from two phase 2, randomized, double-blind clinical trials; two open-label extensions (OLEs) of those trials; and a long-term, open-label, phase 3 safety study. Occurrence of cognitive and psychiatric TEAEs in patients treated with adjunctive cenobamate or placebo during double-blind treatment were evaluated. Exposure-adjusted incidence rates of the cognitive and psychiatric TEAEs, defined as the number of TEAEs per patient-year of treatment, during up to 7 years of long-term adjunctive cenobamate treatment, were determined in the pooled OLE and phase 3 patient populations. RESULTS: The pooled randomized trials resulted in a population of 442 patients treated with cenobamate (100 mg/day: n = 108; 200 mg/day: n = 223; 400 mg/day: n = 111) and 216 placebo-treated patients. The combined open-label studies resulted in pooled populations of cenobamate-treated patients ranging from n = 1690 during Year 1 to n = 103 during Year 7. Among cenobamate-treated (all doses) and placebo-treated patients during double-blind treatment, cognitive TEAEs were reported by ≤ 1.9 % (range, 0 %-1.9 %) and ≤ 0.5 % (range, 0 %-0.5 %), respectively, and psychiatric TEAEs by ≤ 3.6 % (range, 0 %-3.6 %) and ≤ 3.2 % (range, 0 %-3.2 %), respectively. During up to 7 years of open-label adjunctive cenobamate treatment, exposure-adjusted incidence rates of cognitive and psychiatric TEAEs were < 0.018 and < 0.038 events per patient-year, respectively. Discontinuation of adjunctive cenobamate due to cognitive or psychiatric TEAEs assessed in this study during double-blind or open-label treatment occurred in ≤ 0.3 % and ≤ 1.7 % of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Cognitive and psychiatric TEAEs were reported by similar numbers of cenobamate- and placebo-treated patients during double-blind adjunctive cenobamate treatment (< 4 % of patients), and exposure-adjusted incidence rates of these TEAEs remained low during open-label cenobamate treatment for up to 7 years. Treatment discontinuations due to these TEAEs were rare. The results of this post-hoc analysis indicate that adjunctive cenobamate treatment exhibits a low incidence of cognitive or psychiatric TEAEs in patients with uncontrolled focal seizures.

Sublingual lorazepam as rescue therapy for seizure emergencies in adults.

OBJECTIVE: Limited acute home treatments are available for patients with prolonged (>5 minutes) or repetitive (≥2 in 24 hours) seizures. While this early seizure treatment may reduce the need for emergency care, intermittent intranasal benzodiazepine formulations are expensive and rectal diazepam administration is often socially unacceptable. We determined whether caregivers could use sublingual lorazepam oral concentrate solution effectively as acute treatment for adults with prolonged and repetitive seizures. METHODS: Patients prescribed sublingual lorazepam solution at the Johns Hopkins Epilepsy Center for acute seizure treatment during a 5-year period (2012-2017) were screened. We determined clinical history of seizure patterns and number of antiseizure medications (ASMs) through patient and caregiver surveys, and we verified this history in patients' medical records and charts. During a 2-year span (2017-2018), patients and caregivers were surveyed on responses to their most recent use of sublingual lorazepam solution, including seizure cessation (prolonged seizure stopping <5 minutes or ≤1 repetitive seizure), presence of sedation and adverse events within 24 hours of administration, and whether refrigeration limited use. RESULTS: In total, 52 patients used sublingual lorazepam for treatment of acute seizures during the study period (median dose 1 mg, range 0.5 to 2 mg). Of them, 48 patients participated in treatment survey interviews. Family caregivers usually administered lorazepam (88%); 3 self-administered. Patients were surveyed on responses to their most recent use of sublingual lorazepam treatment: 66% (23/35) of patients with repetitive seizures reported no further seizure activity after administering treatment; 70% (7/10) with prolonged seizures reported seizure activity ceased within 5 minutes of treatment. Three patients treated auras and had no seizures. There were no serious adverse events during most recent use: 31% of patients developed moderate/severe sedation. Of note, 98% refrigerated lorazepam, often with coolers; 44%, however, said this limited treatment access. There was high treatment satisfaction; 79% reported that having the emergency treatment available made them feel safer. SIGNIFICANCE: This patient survey and retrospective chart review demonstrates that home treatment with sublingual lorazepam solution may be effective for interrupting prolonged and repetitive seizures. No patients had sedation complications with home doses of 0.5 to 2 mg, and patients report high satisfaction with the treatment.

Failure to use new breakthrough treatments for epilepsy.

Despite the approval of ~20 additional antiseizure medications (ASMs) since the 1980s, one-third of epilepsy patients experience seizures despite therapy. Drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) is associated with cognitive and psychiatric comorbidities, socioeconomic impairment, injuries, and a 9.3-13.4 times higher mortality rate than in seizure-free patients. Improved seizure control can reduce morbidity and mortality. Two new ASMs were launched in the United States in 2020: cenobamate for focal epilepsy in adults and fenfluramine for Dravet syndrome (DS). They offer markedly improved efficacy. Cenobamate achieved 21% seizure freedom with the highest dose and decreased tonic-clonic seizures by 93% during maintenance treatment in a randomized clinical trial (RCT). In long-term, open-label studies, 10%-36% of patients were seizure-free for a median duration of ~30-45 months. Fenfluramine treatment in DS reduced convulsive seizure frequency by 56% over placebo at the highest dose, with 8% of patients free of convulsive seizures, and 25% with only one convulsive seizure over 14 weeks. These results were sustained for up to 3 years in open-label extension studies. Mortality was reduced 5-fold. These results are superior to all other approved ASMs, placing these two drugs among the most effective antiseizure therapies. The adverse event profiles resemble those of other ASMs. Despite greater efficacy and similar toxicity, these medications are infrequently used. Two years after US market entry, < 5% of either adults with focal DRE or patients with DS were treated with either cenobamate or fenfluramine. We believe this is a failure of our medical system, resulting from limited knowledge about these drugs stemming partly from the separation of academia from industry; restrictions to access created by health care payors, hospitals, and regulatory agencies; and insufficient post-launch information about the efficacy and safety of these ASMs.

Seizure Rescue Therapies: Comparing Approved and Commonly Used Benzodiazepine Formulations.

Acute seizure therapies given out of the hospital are important for interrupting acute repetitive and prolonged seizures and preventing hospitalization. These vary in their administration routes, indications for children and adults, pharmacologic profiles, and efficacy. We reviewed and compared the uses of current formulations available to treat acute seizures, including newly released intranasal (IN) benzodiazepines and older formulations which are widely used for interrupting seizures.

Dose Adjustment of Concomitant Antiseizure Medications During Cenobamate Treatment: Expert Opinion Consensus Recommendations.

INTRODUCTION: Our objective was to provide expert consensus recommendations to improve treatment tolerability through dose adjustments of concomitant antiseizure medications (ASMs) during addition of cenobamate to existing ASM therapy in adult patients with uncontrolled focal seizures. METHODS: A panel of seven epileptologists experienced in the use of ASMs, including cenobamate, used a modified Delphi process to reach consensus. The panelists discussed tolerability issues with concomitant ASMs during cenobamate titration and practical strategies for dose adjustments that may prevent or mitigate adverse effects. The resulting recommendations consider concomitant ASM dose level and specify proactive (prior to report of an adverse effect) and reactive (in response to report of an adverse effect) dose adjustment suggestions based on concomitant ASM pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions with cenobamate. Specific dose adjustment recommendations are provided. RESULTS: We recommend proactively lowering the dose of clobazam, phenytoin, and phenobarbital due to their known drug-drug interactions with cenobamate, and lacosamide due to a pharmacodynamic interaction with cenobamate, to prevent adverse effects during cenobamate titration. Reactive lowering of a concomitant ASM dose is sufficient for other ASMs at standard dosing owing to quick resolution of adverse effects. For carbamazepine and lamotrigine doses exceeding the upper end of standard dosing (e.g., carbamazepine, greater than 1200 mg/day; lamotrigine, greater than 500 mg/day), we encourage consideration of proactive dose reduction at cenobamate 200 mg/day to prevent potential adverse effects. All dose reductions for adverse effects can be repeated every 2 weeks as dictated by the adverse effects. At cenobamate 200 mg/day, we recommend that patients be evaluated for marked improvement of seizures and further dose reductions be considered to reduce potentially unnecessary polypharmacy. CONCLUSION: The primary goal of the recommended dose reductions of concomitant ASMs is to prevent or resolve adverse effects, thereby allowing cenobamate to reach the optimal dose to achieve the maximal potential of improving seizure control.

Some people with epilepsy need to take more than one seizure medicine as part of their treatment. Taking more than one seizure medicine, however, can increase the risk of unwanted side effects. One approach to preventing side effects when adding a new seizure medicine is to lower the amount (dose) of existing seizure medicines. Cenobamate is a newer seizure medicine available in the USA for adults with focal seizures (also referred to as partial-onset seizures). Cenobamate, like many seizure medicines, must be titrated over time to a target dose. A group of epilepsy specialists met and developed recommendations for when and how to change the doses of existing seizure medicines when adding cenobamate. The goal of these recommendations is to prevent or reduce side effects like sleepiness or dizziness. The authors recommend that the dose of specific seizure medicines, including clobazam, lacosamide, phenytoin, and phenobarbital, be lowered as cenobamate is started or as cenobamate's dose is being increased (but before side effects occur). Regular doses of other seizure medicines can be lowered if a side effect occurs because reducing the dose of the other seizure medications can often stop the side effect. These recommendations may help patients successfully reach their optimal dose of cenobamate with fewer side effects, potentially improving their seizure control. Video Abstract: Dose Adjustment of Concomitant Antiseizure Medications During Cenobamate Treatment: Expert Opinion Consensus Recommendations.

Future opportunities for research in rescue treatments.

Clinical studies of rescue medications for seizure clusters are limited and are designed to satisfy regulatory requirements, which may not fully consider the needs of the diverse patient population that experiences seizure clusters or utilize rescue medication. The purpose of this narrative review is to examine the factors that contribute to, or may influence the quality of, seizure cluster research with a goal of improving clinical practice. We address five areas of unmet needs and provide advice for how they could enhance future trials of seizure cluster treatments. The topics addressed in this article are: (1) unaddressed end points to pursue in future studies, (2) roles for devices to enhance rescue medication clinical development programs, (3) tools to study seizure cluster prediction and prevention, (4) the value of other designs for seizure cluster studies, and (5) unique challenges of future trial paradigms for seizure clusters. By focusing on novel end points and technologies with value to patients, caregivers, and clinicians, data obtained from future studies can benefit the diverse patient population that experiences seizure clusters, providing more effective, appropriate care as well as alleviating demands on health care resources.

Efficacy of cenobamate for uncontrolled focal seizures in patients with previous epilepsy-related surgery: Post hoc analysis of a phase 3, multicenter, open-label study.

OBJECTIVE: This post hoc analysis of 10 US study sites from a long-term open-label phase 3 study of adjunctive cenobamate evaluated the efficacy of cenobamate in patients with prior epilepsy-related surgery. METHODS: Patients with uncontrolled focal seizures despite taking stable doses of 1-3 concomitant antiseizure medications (ASMs) received increasing doses of cenobamate (12.5, 25, 50, 100, 150, 200 mg/day) at 2-week intervals over 12 weeks (target dose, 200 mg/day). Further increases up to 400 mg/day using biweekly 50-mg/day increments were allowed during the maintenance phase. Dose adjustments of cenobamate and concomitant ASMs were allowed. Data were assessed until the last clinic visit on or after September 1, 2019. RESULTS: Of the 240 eligible patients, 85 had prior epilepsy-related surgery and 155 were nonsurgical patients. Baseline focal seizure frequency per 28 days was numerically higher among prior surgery (mean=25.9/median=4.1/range=0.3-562.3) versus nonsurgical (mean=13.8/median=2.4/range=0.2-534.2) patients. Among all patients, 100 % seizure reduction ≥ 12 months at any consecutive month interval occurred in 30.6 % (26/85) prior surgery and 39.4 % (61/155; p > 0.05) nonsurgical patients (cenobamate treatment median duration=32.9 months). Among the 177 patients still receiving cenobamate at the data cutoff, 29.2 % (19/65) of prior surgery and 36.6 % (41/112; p > 0.05) of nonsurgical patients had 100 % seizure reduction ≥ 12 months at the data cutoff. Cenobamate was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: This post hoc analysis supports the efficacy of cenobamate in patients with refractory focal seizures despite prior surgery. These findings suggest cenobamate may be considered early in the treatment regimen, including, in some patients, before surgery is considered.

Long-Term Efficacy and Safety From an Open-Label Extension of Adjunctive Cenobamate in Patients With Uncontrolled Focal Seizures.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate long-term efficacy (percent seizure frequency reduction and responder rates), safety, and tolerability of adjunctive cenobamate in an open-label extension (OLE) of the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. METHODS: Patients (aged 18-70 years) with uncontrolled focal seizures despite treatment with 1-3 antiseizure medications who completed the 18-week double-blind study (n=360) could enter the OLE, where they underwent a 2-week blinded conversion to cenobamate (target dose, 300 mg/day; min/max, 50/400 mg/day). RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-five patients were included in the OLE safety population (265 originally randomized to cenobamate, 90 originally randomized to placebo), and 354 were included in the OLE modified intent-to-treat population. As of July 2019, 58.9% (209/355) of patients were continuing cenobamate treatment and 141 had discontinued, including 16.6% (59/355) due to lack of efficacy, 8.7% (31/355) due to withdrawal by patient, and 7.6% (27/355) due to adverse events. Median (range) duration of OLE exposure was 53.9 (1.1-68.7) months. Retention rates at 12, 24, 36, and 48 months were 83%, 71%, 65%, and 62%, respectively. Median percent seizure frequency reduction over baseline increased with each 6-month OLE interval, up to 76.1% at months 43-48. Among observed patients, 16.4% (36/220) achieved 100% and 39.1% (86/220) achieved ≥90% seizure reduction during >36-48 months. Among the initial OLE mITT population, 10.2% (36/354) of patients achieved 100% and 24.3% (86/354) achieved ≥90% seizure reduction during >36-48 months. Similar to the double-blind study, adverse events (AEs) included dizziness, somnolence, fatigue, and headache. Serious AEs occurred in 20.3% (72/355) of patients. CONCLUSION: Long-term efficacy, including 100% and ≥90% seizure reduction, was sustained during 48 months of cenobamate treatment, with 71% retention at 24 months. No new safety issues were identified. These results confirm the findings of the double-blind study and support the potential long-term clinical benefit of cenobamate. REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01866111. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class IV evidence that oral Cenobamate 50-400 mg/day is effective as an adjunctive treatment for the long-term management of patients with uncontrolled focal seizures previously treated with 1 to 3 ASMs.

Seizure triggers identified postictally using a smart watch reporting system.

Persons with epilepsy (PWE) often report that seizure triggers can influence the occurrence and timing of seizures. Some previous studies of seizure triggers have relied on retrospective daily seizure diaries or surveys pertaining to all past seizures, recent and/or remote, in respondents. To assess the characteristics of seizure triggers at the granularity of individual seizures, we used a seizure-tracking app, called EpiWatch, on a smart watch system (Apple Watch and iPhone) in a national study of PWE. Participants tracked seizures during a 16-month study period using the EpiWatch app. Seizure tracking was initiated during a pre-ictal state or as the seizure was occurring and included collection of biosensor data, responsiveness testing, and completion of an immediate post-seizure survey. The survey evaluated seizure types, auras or warning symptoms, loss of awareness, use of rescue medication, and seizure triggers for each tracked seizure. Two hundred and thirty four participants tracked 2493 seizures. Ninety six participants reported triggers in 650 seizures: stress (65.8%), lack of sleep (30.5%), menstrual cycle (19.7%), and overexertion (18%) were the most common. Participants often reported having multiple combined triggers, frequent stress with lack of sleep, overexertion, or menses. Participants who reported triggers were more likely to be taking 3 or more anti-seizure medications compared to participants who did not report triggers. Participants were able to interact with the app and use mobile technology in this national study to record seizures and report common seizure triggers. These findings demonstrate the promise of longitudinal, self-reported data to improve our understanding of epilepsy and its related comorbidities.

Association of Head Injury With Late-Onset Epilepsy: Results From the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Cohort.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Late-onset epilepsy (LOE; i.e., epilepsy starting in later adulthood) affects a significant number of individuals. Head injury is also a risk factor for acquired epilepsy, but the degree to which prior head injury may contribute to LOE is less well understood. Our objective was to determine the association between head injury and subsequent development of LOE. METHODS: Included were 8,872 participants enrolled in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study with continuous Centers for Medicare Services fee-for-service (FFS) coverage (55.1% women, 21.6% Black). We identified head injuries through 2018 from linked Medicare fee for service claims for inpatient/emergency department care, active surveillance of hospitalizations, and participant self-report. LOE cases through 2018 were identified from linked Medicare FFS claims. We used Cox proportional hazards models to evaluate associations of head injury with LOE, adjusting for demographic, cardiovascular, and lifestyle factors. RESULTS: The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for developing LOE after a history of head injury was 1.88 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.44-2.43). There was evidence for dose-response associations with greater risk for LOE with increasing number of prior head injuries (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.01-1.88 for 1 prior head injury and HR 3.55, 95% CI 2.51-5.02 for 2+ prior head injuries, compared to no head injuries) and with more severe head injury (HR 2.53, 95% CI 1.83-3.49 for mild injury and HR 4.90, 95% CI 3.15-7.64 for moderate/severe injury, compared to no head injuries). Associations with LOE were significant for head injuries sustained at older age (age ≥67 years: HR 4.01, 95% CI 2.91-5.54), but not for head injuries sustained at younger age (age < 67 years: HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.68-1.41). DISCUSSION: Head injury was associated with increased risk of developing LOE, particularly when head injuries were sustained at an older age, and there was evidence for higher risk for LOE after a greater number of prior head injuries and after more severe head injuries. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class I evidence that an increased risk of late-onset epilepsy is associated with head injury and that this risk increases further with multiple and more severe head injuries.

Post hoc analysis of a phase 3, multicenter, open-label study of cenobamate for treatment of uncontrolled focal seizures: Effects of dose adjustments of concomitant antiseizure medications.

OBJECTIVE: To report post hoc results on how adjustments to baseline antiseizure medications (ASMs) in a subset of study sites (10 US sites) from a long-term, open-label phase 3 study of adjunctive cenobamate affected tolerability, efficacy, and retention. METHODS: Patients with uncontrolled focal seizures taking stable doses of one to three ASMs were administered increasing doses of cenobamate (12.5, 25, 50, 100, 150, 200 mg/day) over 12 weeks at 2-week intervals (target dose = 200 mg/day). Further increases to 400 mg/day by 50 mg/day biweekly increments were allowed during maintenance phase. Dose adjustments of cenobamate and concomitant ASMs were allowed. Data were assessed until last visit, at data cut-off, on or after September 1, 2019. RESULTS: A total of 240 patients meeting eligibility criteria were assessed (median [max] exposure 30.2 [43.0] months), with 177 patients continuing cenobamate at data cut-off. Most common baseline concomitant ASMs were lacosamide, levetiracetam, lamotrigine, zonisamide, and clobazam. For most baseline concomitant ASMs, ~70% of patients taking that ASM were continuing cenobamate at data cut-off. Patients continuing cenobamate had greater mean ASM dose reductions and percent dose changes from baseline vs those who discontinued. Of patients continuing cenobamate, 24.6% discontinued one or more concomitant ASMs completely. Dose decreases for all concomitant ASMs generally occurred during titration or early maintenance phases and were mostly due to central nervous system (CNS)-related adverse events such as somnolence, dizziness, unsteady gait, and fatigue. Responder rates from ≥50% through 100% for patients continuing cenobamate were generally similar regardless of concomitant ASMs (of those most commonly taken), with ~81% being ≥50% responders and ~12% achieving 100% seizure reduction in the maintenance phase, which lasted up to 40.2 (median = 29.5) months. SIGNIFICANCE: Concomitant ASM dose reductions were associated with more patients remaining on cenobamate. This is likely due to efficacy and improved tolerability, with overall reduced concomitant drug burden in patients with uncontrolled seizures despite taking one to three baseline concomitant ASMs.

Efficacy of cenobamate for uncontrolled focal seizures: Post hoc analysis of a Phase 3, multicenter, open-label study.

OBJECTIVE: To report long-term post hoc efficacy and safety data from 10 US study sites from an open-label Phase 3 study of adjunctive cenobamate (NCT02535091). METHODS: Patients with uncontrolled focal seizures taking stable doses of 1-3 antiseizure medications (ASMs) were administered increasing daily doses of cenobamate (12.5, 25, 50, 100, 150, 200 mg/day) over 12 weeks at 2-week intervals (target dose = 200 mg/day). Further increases to 400 mg/day by 50-mg/day increments biweekly were allowed during the maintenance phase. Dose adjustments of cenobamate and concomitant ASMs were allowed. Data were assessed until the last clinic visit on or after September 1, 2019. RESULTS: Of 255 patients, 240 with focal aware motor, focal impaired awareness, or focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizure data while on treatment were evaluated (median [maximum] exposure = 30.2 [43.0] months across the entire study). Median baseline seizure frequency/28 days was 2.8 (mean = 18.1). Of the 240 patients, 177 (73.8%) were continuing cenobamate treatment at data cutoff. The ≥50% responder rate for the total treatment duration was 71.7% (172/240). During titration, the ≥50% responder rates were 48.1% during Weeks 1-4 (12.5-25 mg/day cenobamate) and 61.7% during Weeks 5-8 (50-100 mg/day cenobamate). Among all patients who received a dose of cenobamate in the maintenance phase (n = 214), 13.1% (28/214) and 40.2% (86/214) achieved 100% and ≥90% seizure reduction during their entire maintenance treatment duration (median = 29.5 months). Among all patients, 87 (36.3%) had any consecutive ≥12-month duration of 100% seizure reduction. Common treatment-emergent adverse events among all 240 patients included fatigue (34.6%), dizziness (32.1%), and somnolence (29.6%). SIGNIFICANCE: This post hoc analysis of a subset of patients from the long-term open-label study showed high rates of sustained 100% and ≥90% seizure reduction, with many achieving response early during titration. These findings suggest durable seizure frequency reduction with cenobamate in adults with uncontrolled focal seizures.

Practical guidance for the management of adults receiving adjunctive cenobamate for the treatment of focal epilepsy-expert opinion.

Clinical trial results have demonstrated that adjunctive cenobamate (CNB) substantially decreases seizure frequency in adults with uncontrolled focal onset seizures with an acceptable and well-identified safety profile. This manuscript summarizes an expert panel's recommendations regarding optimized CNB treatment of epilepsies with focal onset seizures. Cenobamate, when slowly titrated to the target maintenance dose, represents an effective new antiseizure medication (ASM) with a comparatively high rate of seizure freedom relative to existing treatment options. This paper reviews selection of suitable CNB treatment candidates, realistic treatment expectations and goals, appropriate CNB target doses, and methods to mitigate or avoid potential adverse events. Cenobamate can be a promising therapeutic choice for adult people with epilepsy with focal onset seizures who do not reach adequate seizure control despite treatment with conventional ASMs.

Suicidality Risk of Newer Antiseizure Medications: A Meta-analysis.

Importance: Most antiseizure medications (ASMs) carry a US Food and Drug Administration-mandated class label warning of increased suicidality risk, based on a meta-analysis comparing suicidality between individuals treated with medications vs placebo in randomized clinical trials done before 2008. ASMs approved since then carry this warning although they were not similarly studied. Objective: To review all placebo-controlled phase 2 and 3 studies of 10 ASMs approved since 2008 to evaluate the risk of suicidality of these drugs compared with placebo. Data Sources: Primary publications and secondary safety analyses in PubMed of all phase 2 and 3 randomized placebo-controlled epilepsy trials of ASMs approved since 2008, using keywords epilepsy, antiepileptic drugs, seizures, suicidality, suicidal ideation, and the names of individual drugs. Study Selection: All phase 2 and 3 randomized clinical trials of adjunctive treatment of drug-resistant epilepsy and their secondary safety analyses. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Articles were reviewed for frequency of suicidality (ideation, attempts, and completed suicides). Mode of suicidality ascertainment included treatment-emergent adverse event reports, Standardized Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities queries for events in prespecified categories including suicidal ideation and behavior, prospective collection of suicidality data as a prespecified safety outcome using the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale, and retrospective evaluation by blinded review using the Columbia-Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment. A meta-analysis compared risk for drugs vs placebo of each outcome for all drugs overall and by individual drugs and trials. Main Outcomes and Measures: Suicidality (total and by ideation), attempts, and completed suicides. Results: Excluding studies that did not evaluate suicidality (everolimus and fenfluramine) or did not evaluate it prospectively (lacosamide, ezogabine, and clobazam), 5 drugs were analyzed: eslicarbazepine, perampanel, brivaracetam, cannabidiol, and cenobamate. Suicidality was evaluated in 17 randomized clinical trials of these drugs, involving 5996 patients, of whom 4000 patients were treated with ASMs and 1996 with placebo. There was no evidence of increased risk of suicidal ideation (drugs vs placebo overall risk ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.35-1.60) or attempt (risk ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.30-1.87) overall or for any individual drug. Suicidal ideation occurred in 12 of 4000 patients treated with ASMs (0.30%) vs 7 of 1996 patients treated with placebo (0.35%) (P = .74). Three patients treated with ASMs and no patients treated with placebo attempted suicide (P = .22). There were no completed suicides. Conclusions and Relevance: There is no current evidence that the 5 ASMs evaluated in this study increase suicidality in epilepsy and merit a suicidality class warning.

Long-term safety of adjunctive cenobamate in patients with uncontrolled focal seizures: Open-label extension of a randomized clinical study.

OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to examine long-term (up to 7.8 years) retention rate, safety, and tolerability of the antiseizure medication (ASM) cenobamate as adjunctive treatment in the open-label extension (OLE) of study YKP3089C013 (C013; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01397968). METHODS: Patients who completed the 12-week, multicenter, multinational, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled C013 study, which examined adjunctive cenobamate treatment of adults with uncontrolled focal seizures, were eligible to enroll in the OLE. During the OLE, dose adjustments of cenobamate and concomitant ASMs were allowed. Safety assessments included frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and serious TEAEs, TEAE severity, and TEAEs leading to discontinuation. Probability of patient continuation in the OLE was examined using a Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: One hundred forty-nine patients entered the OLE (median duration of cenobamate treatment = 6.25 years). As of the data cutoff, 57% of patients (85/149) remained in the OLE (median treatment duration = 6.8 years, range = 6.4-7.8 years). The median modal daily cenobamate dose was 200 mg (range = 50-400 mg). The probability of treatment continuation at 1-6 years of cenobamate treatment was 73%, 67%, 63%, 61%, 60%, and 59%, respectively. Among patients who continued at 1 year (n = 107), the probability of continuing at Years 2-5 was 92%, 87%, 83%, and 82%. The most common discontinuation reasons were patient withdrawal (19.5%, 29/149), adverse event (10.1%, 15/149), and lack of efficacy (5.4%, 8/149). TEAEs leading to discontinuation in 1% or more of patients were fatigue (1.3%, 2/149), ataxia (1.3%, 2/149), and memory impairment or amnesia (1.3%, 2/149). Dizziness (32.9%, 49/149), headache (26.8%, 40/149), and somnolence (21.5%, 32/149) were the most frequently reported TEAEs and were primarily mild or moderate in severity. SIGNIFICANCE: Long-term retention in the C013 OLE study demonstrated sustained safety and tolerability of adjunctive cenobamate treatment up to 7.8 years in adults with treatment-resistant focal seizures taking one to three ASMs.

Mortality in Patients With Late-Onset Epilepsy: Results From the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To determine the risk of mortality and causes of death in persons with late-onset epilepsy (LOE) compared to those without epilepsy in a community-based sample, adjusting for demographics and comorbid conditions. METHODS: This is an analysis of the prospective Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study, initiated in 1987-1989 among 15,792 mostly Black and White men and women in 4 US communities. We used Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services fee-for-service claims codes to identify cases of incident epilepsy starting at or after age 67. We used Cox proportional hazards analysis to identify the hazard of mortality associated with LOE and to adjust for demographics and vascular risk factors. We used death certificate data to identify dates and causes of death. RESULTS: Analyses included 9,090 participants, of whom 678 developed LOE during median 11.5 years of follow-up after age 67. Participants who developed LOE were at an increased hazard of mortality compared to those who did not, with adjusted hazard ratio 2.39 (95% confidence interval 2.12-2.71). We observed excess mortality due to stroke, dementia, neurologic conditions, and end-stage renal disease in participants with compared to without LOE. Only 4 deaths (1.1%) were directly attributed to seizure-related causes. CONCLUSIONS: Persons who develop LOE are at increased risk of death compared to those without epilepsy, even after adjusting for comorbidities. The majority of this excess mortality is due to stroke and dementia.

A multivariable prediction model of a major treatment response for focal-onset seizures: A post-hoc analysis of Phase III trials of perampanel.

OBJECTIVE: Although 50 % reduction in seizure frequency is a common efficacy endpoint in clinical trials of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), 75 % or greater reductions may be required to improve patients' health-related quality of life. Identification of clinical factors that are associated with high responder rates may help to inform clinicians on which patients may optimally benefit from treatment. We evaluated potential predictive factors for achieving major treatment responses (≥75 % reduction in seizure frequency per 28 days from study baseline) in patients with drug-resistant focal-onset seizures, with/without focal to bilateral tonic-clonic (FBTC) seizures in perampanel trials designed for regulatory approval. METHODS: Univariate analyses using logistic regression were performed using data from three double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase III studies of adjunctive perampanel (Studies 304 [NCT00699972], 305 [NCT00699582], 306 [NCT00700310]), and their open-label extension study (OLEx; Study 307 [NCT00735397]). For the double-blind studies, baseline seizure frequency, number of baseline AEDs, baseline seizure type, baseline concomitant enzyme-inducing AEDs (EIAEDs), baseline carbamazepine, lamotrigine, or valproic acid, age at diagnosis, time since diagnosis, etiology, and perampanel plasma concentration were included individually with study treatment. The same factors were included for the OLEx analysis except for plasma concentration and treatment. Variables found to be significant predictors for a major treatment response in univariate analyses were subsequently included in multivariable analyses using backwards and forwards selection. RESULTS: In the double-blind studies, 175/1374 patients had a major response to placebo (n = 25) or perampanel (n = 150). The best predictors of a major treatment response in multivariable models with forwards and backwards selection were: the presence of FBTC seizures during baseline (P = 0.0002), higher perampanel plasma concentration (P < 0.0001), older age at diagnosis (P = 0.0024 and 0.0045, respectively), and lower baseline seizure frequency (P = 0.0364 and 0.0127, respectively). In the OLEx, 217/1090 patients had a major treatment response. The best predictors of a major treatment response in the final multivariable model, regardless of backwards or forwards selection, were a lower baseline seizure frequency (P = 0.0022), the absence of focal impaired awareness seizures during baseline (P = 0.0011), the presence of FBTC seizures during baseline (P = 0.0164), lower number(s) of baseline AEDs (P = 0.0002), the absence of EIAEDs during baseline (P = 0.0059), an older age at diagnosis (P = 0.0054), and absence of structural etiologies (P = 0.0138). SIGNIFICANCE: These analyses of placebo-controlled and long-term extension trial data identified a number of potential predictive factors for patients with focal-onset seizures achieving a major treatment response. These factors may help guide clinicians when predicting a patient's response to treatment and optimizing individual treatment regimens.

Cenobamate treatment of focal-onset seizures: Quality of life and outcome during up to eight years of treatment.

A large proportion of patients with focal-onset epilepsy have frequent seizures despite treatment with newer anti-seizure medications (ASMs). We describe our experience optimizing cenobamate treatment for 49 patients treated at one center for up to eight years. We assessed the influence of treatment response on measurements of quality of life (QOLIE). Forty-nine patients were evaluated from three cenobamate regulatory trials: two open-label extensions of randomized placebo-controlled studies and one open-label safety study at the Johns Hopkins Hospital (JHU). Patients had focal-onset seizures despite treatment with one to three ASMs and were 18 years of age and older. Patients kept seizure diaries for the duration of the study and had tri-monthly evaluations. Seizure responder rates were determined, and patients with long-term seizure freedom (≥six months seizure free) were identified. Cenobamate doses were adjusted within the range of 100-400 mg/day. Johns Hopkins Hospital patients who were continuing treatment when the studies ended (n = 37) were administered the QOLIE-31 survey and a separate survey to assess changes in independence and epilepsy-linked disability at the end of the study at JHU. Thirty-seven of 49 (76%) patients continued treatment for three to eight years (median 5.6 years). In their final three months of treatment, 45% of patients achieved ≥75% seizure reduction, 29% had ≥90% reduction, and 16% were seizure free (responder rates computed with n = 49). Posttraumatic etiologies did not reduce treatment responses. Increased dosage of cenobamate across 150-400 mg/day range was significantly associated with higher responder rates (p < 0.001). High seizure responses-particularly ≥90% reduction-correlated with high QOLIE scores. Patients with drug-resistant focal-onset epilepsy had stable treatment responses during up to eight years of cenobamate treatment. Patients often tolerated high doses of cenobamate; high responders appeared to benefit with high QOLIE scores.

Dementia in late-onset epilepsy: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the risk of dementia after the development of late-onset epilepsy. METHODS: We used data from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) cohort study, which started in 1987 to 1989 with 15,792 mostly Black and White men and women from 4 US communities. We identified late-onset epilepsy (LOE; seizures starting at age 67 or later) from linked Medicare claims data. We used a Cox proportional hazards regression model to evaluate associations between LOE and dementia through 2017 as ascertained from neuropsychological testing, interviews, and hospital discharge surveillance, and we used multinomial logistic regression to assess the risk of dementia and mild cognitive impairment in the subset with full neuropsychological assessments available. We adjusted for demographics and vascular and Alzheimer disease risk factors. RESULTS: Of 9,033 ARIC participants with sufficient Medicare coverage data (4,980 [55.1%] female, 1993 [22.1%] Black), 671 met the definition of LOE. Two hundred seventy-nine (41.6%) participants with and 1,408 (16.8%) without LOE developed dementia (p < 0.001). After a diagnosis of LOE, the adjusted hazard ratio for developing subsequent dementia was 3.05 (95% confidence interval 2.65-3.51). The median time to dementia ascertainment after the onset of LOE was 3.66 years (quartile 1-3, 1.28-8.28 years). INTERPRETATION: The risk of incident dementia is substantially elevated in individuals with LOE. Further work is needed to explore causes for the increased risk of dementia in this growing population.