Prateek Kumar Panda , Biswaroop Chakrabarty , Prashant Jauhari , Indar Kumar Sharawat , Anuja Agarwal , Vandana Jain , Ravindra M. Pandey , Sheffali Gulati
{"title":"Efficacy of daily versus intermittent low glycemic index therapy diet in children with drug-resistant epilepsy: A randomized controlled trial","authors":"Prateek Kumar Panda , Biswaroop Chakrabarty , Prashant Jauhari , Indar Kumar Sharawat , Anuja Agarwal , Vandana Jain , Ravindra M. Pandey , Sheffali Gulati","doi":"10.1016/j.eplepsyres.2024.107322","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>The predominant reason for the discontinuation of low glycemic index therapy (LGIT) in children with epilepsy is the dietary restrictions imposed therein. This trial intended to compare the efficacy of daily and intermittent LGIT in children with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE).</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This study was performed between February 2018 and January 2019 to compare the efficacy of daily and intermittent LGIT in children aged 1–15 years with DRE following 24 weeks of dietary therapy. Compliance, the difficulty faced by caregivers, adverse effects, impact on behaviour, and social quotient in both arms were compared. Children in the intermittent LGIT arm received a liberalized diet for two days every week (Saturday and Sunday), which also allowed medium glycemic index foods. Carbohydrate calories were allowed up to 20% of the total caloric requirement in the liberalized diet, as compared to only 10% in standard LGIT.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Out of 132 children randomized (66 in each group), 122 completed 24 weeks follow up. Mean weekly seizure frequency reduction at 24 weeks in the intermittent LGIT group was comparable with that of the daily LGIT group in both intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol analysis (−50.95%± 22.34% vs −47.16%± 23.41%, p=0.36 in ITT and −53.88%±20.54% vs −49.20%±21.87%, p=0.23) in per-protocol analysis for intermittent and daily LGIT group respectively). The proportion with ≥50% reduction in seizure frequency was also comparable between both groups (p=0.73 and 0.56 in ITT and per protocol analysis respectively). The proportion of patients with adverse events and satisfactory compliance rate also had a trend towards favoring intermittent LGIT (p=0.06 and 0.51, respectively), while caregiver difficulty was lower with intermittent LGIT (p=0.001).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Intermittent LGIT is comparable to daily LGIT in terms of seizure frequency reduction after 24 weeks of dietary therapy.</p></div><div><h3>Trial registration</h3><p>ClinicalTrials.gov (Registration number- NCT03464487, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03464487).</p></div>","PeriodicalId":11914,"journal":{"name":"Epilepsy Research","volume":"201 ","pages":"Article 107322"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epilepsy Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0920121124000378","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction
The predominant reason for the discontinuation of low glycemic index therapy (LGIT) in children with epilepsy is the dietary restrictions imposed therein. This trial intended to compare the efficacy of daily and intermittent LGIT in children with drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE).
Methods
This study was performed between February 2018 and January 2019 to compare the efficacy of daily and intermittent LGIT in children aged 1–15 years with DRE following 24 weeks of dietary therapy. Compliance, the difficulty faced by caregivers, adverse effects, impact on behaviour, and social quotient in both arms were compared. Children in the intermittent LGIT arm received a liberalized diet for two days every week (Saturday and Sunday), which also allowed medium glycemic index foods. Carbohydrate calories were allowed up to 20% of the total caloric requirement in the liberalized diet, as compared to only 10% in standard LGIT.
Results
Out of 132 children randomized (66 in each group), 122 completed 24 weeks follow up. Mean weekly seizure frequency reduction at 24 weeks in the intermittent LGIT group was comparable with that of the daily LGIT group in both intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol analysis (−50.95%± 22.34% vs −47.16%± 23.41%, p=0.36 in ITT and −53.88%±20.54% vs −49.20%±21.87%, p=0.23) in per-protocol analysis for intermittent and daily LGIT group respectively). The proportion with ≥50% reduction in seizure frequency was also comparable between both groups (p=0.73 and 0.56 in ITT and per protocol analysis respectively). The proportion of patients with adverse events and satisfactory compliance rate also had a trend towards favoring intermittent LGIT (p=0.06 and 0.51, respectively), while caregiver difficulty was lower with intermittent LGIT (p=0.001).
Conclusions
Intermittent LGIT is comparable to daily LGIT in terms of seizure frequency reduction after 24 weeks of dietary therapy.
期刊介绍:
Epilepsy Research provides for publication of high quality articles in both basic and clinical epilepsy research, with a special emphasis on translational research that ultimately relates to epilepsy as a human condition. The journal is intended to provide a forum for reporting the best and most rigorous epilepsy research from all disciplines ranging from biophysics and molecular biology to epidemiological and psychosocial research. As such the journal will publish original papers relevant to epilepsy from any scientific discipline and also studies of a multidisciplinary nature. Clinical and experimental research papers adopting fresh conceptual approaches to the study of epilepsy and its treatment are encouraged. The overriding criteria for publication are novelty, significant clinical or experimental relevance, and interest to a multidisciplinary audience in the broad arena of epilepsy. Review articles focused on any topic of epilepsy research will also be considered, but only if they present an exceptionally clear synthesis of current knowledge and future directions of a research area, based on a critical assessment of the available data or on hypotheses that are likely to stimulate more critical thinking and further advances in an area of epilepsy research.