Epilepsy Research最新文献

Background: Status epilepticus (SE) is a life-threatening state that needs rapid and adequate treatment. Benzodiazepines (BZD) are used as a first-line treatment for SE, and if the desired effect is not achieved, second-line antiseizure medications are used.

Objective: To investigate whether the treatment with BZDs is performed adequately in patients with different subtypes of SE requiring second-line ASM treatment and, if not, to identify the factors influencing the suboptimal treatment.

Patients and methods: This is a retrospective single centre study from the patient register of Tampere University Hospital including patients over 16 years of age with a diagnosis of SE, seizure or epilepsy and who received intravenous (IV) ASM during a one-year period in 2015. Treatment was considered to be suboptimal if it was not in line with the latest European, Finnish or American guidelines.

Results: In total, 109 episodes were registered. The largest group was that with convulsive SE with 56 episodes, followed by postictal with 23 episodes, nonconvulsive status epilepticus (NCSE) with 22 episodes, and focal awareness SE (FASE) with eight episodes. Overall, in 77 % of the episodes, BZDs were administered, and in 43 % of the episodes, treatment was in line with guidelines. In the NCSE group, BZD was administered less often and was less often in line with the guidelines than in the CSE group (27.3 % vs. 89.3 %, p < 0.001 and 4.5 % vs. 55.4 %, p < 0.001). For FASE episodes, the concordance with the guidelines was low. After IV administration, the mean BZD dose was lower than that after buccal administration of midazolam (2.1 mg vs. 8.7 mg) or after rectal administration of diazepam (4.5 mg vs. 10.0 mg). Lorazepam was administered only via the IV route, with mean dosage of 2.6 mg. Clinical characteristics did not influence the dosing of BZDs.

Conclusions: BZDs were both underdosed and underused for all subtypes of SE. In particular, their use for NCSE was infrequent and suboptimal. The divergence from the guidelines was influenced especially by low IV dosages.

Background: Epilepsy is a major neurological disorder, typically managed with Anti-Seizure Medication (ASM). Nevertheless, a substantial 30 % of patients did not respond satisfactorily to ASMs, classifying their condition as Drug-Resistant Epilepsy (DRE). Vagus Nerve Stimulation (VNS) was recommended as a potential solution.

Objective: To evaluate clinical efficacy of VNS on patients with DRE in reduction of seizures through a systematic review and meta-analysis using a random effects model.

Methods: A systematic search was done from PubMed, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar databases on observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for the clinical effectiveness of VNS among DRE patients. A meta-analysis was performed to obtain the pooled estimate of the clinical effectiveness of VNS in terms of seizure reduction and the odds ratio (OR) for patients achieving > 50 % seizure reduction. Heterogeneity was assessed using visual inspection of forest plots and I² statistic.

Results: A total of 1023 articles were retrieved from the electronic search. After removing duplicates, non-relevance and non-availability of efficacy data, 28 articles were included in the final analysis. Of these, 9 are RCTs and 19 are observational studies. The pooled estimate of > 50 % seizure reduction was 0.46 (95 % CI: 0.40-0.51) and the pooled estimate of the OR comparing > 50 % vs ≤ 50 % seizure reduction was 0.76 (95 % CI: 0.44-1.29).

Conclusion: Our meta-analysis showed that 46 % of DRE patients have experienced ≥ 50 % seizure reduction with VNS treatment. It should be considered in patients in whom ASM has failed or who continue to experience seizures after medication.

Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS) is a severe developmental and epileptic encephalopathy characterized by multiple drug-resistant seizure types, cognitive impairment, and distinctive electroencephalographic patterns. Neuromodulation techniques, including vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), deep brain stimulation (DBS), and responsive neurostimulation (RNS), have emerged as important treatment options for patients with LGS who do not respond adequately to antiseizure medications. This review, developed with input from the Pediatric Epilepsy Research Consortium (PERC) LGS Special Interest Group, provides practical guidance for clinicians on the use of these neuromodulation approaches in patients with LGS. We discuss patient selection criteria, expected seizure and non-seizure outcomes, potential complications, and device management considerations for each technique. The review also covers initiation and titration strategies, ongoing care requirements, and emerging data on combining multiple neuromodulation modalities. While all three approaches can reduce seizure frequency in patients with LGS, with commonly reported responder rates ranging from 50 % to 60 %, their impacts on cognition, behavior and quality of life are more variable. Careful patient selection, individualized programming, and long-term follow-up are essential to optimize outcomes with neuromodulation in this challenging patient population. Further research is needed to identify optimal candidates, determine the ideal timing during patients' clinical course to consider neuromodulation, develop standardized outcome measures, and evaluate the comparative effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different neuromodulation techniques for LGS.

Objective: Efficacy, tolerability, and behavioral/executive functioning during long-term adjunctive brivaracetam treatment were assessed in pediatric patients with focal-onset seizures (FOS) with/without cognitive/learning comorbidities (CLC).

Methods: Post hoc analysis of a phase 3 open-label follow-up trial (N01266/NCT01364597). Patients with FOS (<16 years at core trial entry; direct enrollers ≥4-<17 years) received ≤5 mg/kg/day brivaracetam (≤200 mg/day). Subgroup analyses were performed for patients with and without ongoing CLC at baseline.

Results: Patients with CLC (84/185 [45.4 %]) had longer epilepsy duration and higher number of prior antiseizure medications. Kaplan-Meier-estimated brivaracetam retention at 1, 3, and 5 years was 75.0 %/78.2 %, 61.9 %/61.9 %, and 52.2 %/53.3 % in patients with/without CLC. Efficacy assessments (patients >2 years of age) showed numerically lower median percent reduction in FOS frequency/28 days (43.8 %/74.1 % [n = 63/60]), 50 % responder rates for FOS (46.0 %/61.7 % [n = 63/60]), and ≥12-month continuous freedom from all seizures (31.7 %/55.9 % [n = 60/68 patients with ≥12 months treatment]) in patients with/without CLC. Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 94.0 %/95.0 % of patients with/without CLC (serious: 33.3 %/27.7 %; drug-related: 31.0 %/33.7 %). From baseline to last evaluation, most patients with/without CLC had no shift in T-score category for each Achenbach Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) 1.5-5 syndrome (≥50.0 %/≥72.2 %), CBCL 6-18 syndrome (≥66.0 %/≥69.1 %), and Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function scale (≥66.7 %/≥69.0 %).

Conclusions: These data indicate that brivaracetam could be an efficacious and well-tolerated treatment option for pediatric patients with FOS with and without CLC. Behavior and executive functioning were generally stable or slightly improved in patients with and without CLC.

While the genetic architecture of epilepsy is complex and presumably polygenic in many cases, pathogenic variants have increasingly been identified, and this is perhaps best exemplified by the monogenic familial focal epilepsies. Although individuals with epilepsy (particularly focal epilepsy) are at increased risk of developing psychosis, little has been written on this topic in relation to monogenic familial focal epilepsy, specifically. As such, this systematic review aimed to characterize the phenomenology of psychosis (and response to antipsychotic therapy) in affected individuals. Only eight articles were identified and minimal information with respect to psychiatric phenotyping was provided in most cases. As such, although no firm conclusions can be drawn, it is notable that none of the reports described a temporal relationship between seizure and psychosis onset; the typical convention used in epilepsy. As most reports also did not include primary psychotic disorder diagnoses, it remains unclear if the individuals' presentations were understood to represent epileptic psychoses or schizophrenia, and to what degree (if at all) their genetic variants were thought to have contributed directly to psychosis risk. More robust case descriptions are needed to better characterize the nature of psychotic symptoms (and their response to treatment) in monogenic familial focal epilepsy.

Introduction: Older patients with Late onset epilepsy (LOE) provide a special set of difficulties for both the treating doctors and the patients.

Objectives: To address the characteristics and treatment outcomes of LOE in a cohort of Egyptian population at a tertiary center and to assess factors affecting seizure freedom in this age group.

Methods: From December 1, 1995, to November 30, 2020, we analysed all patients with newly diagnosed epilepsy above the age of 50 at Cairo University's neurology department. The term "seizure freedom" was used to refer to the absence of seizures or auras for at least 12 months. Patients were classified as either having achieved seizure freedom or not.

Results: One hundred and twenty-one patients were included. The median follow-up time was 24 months. 69.4 % attain seizure freedom. 52.1 % of our patients had symptomatic epilepsy. Among this group, 31.4 % (n = 38) had epilepsy caused by cerebrovascular disease (ischemic or hemorrhagic). Patients with epileptogenic lesions in neuroimaging, and those who are receiving ≥ 2 ASMs had significantly higher probability of not achieving seizure freedom for 12 months compared to those with normal or non-epileptogenic lesions in neuroimaging and receiving ≤ 1 ASMs with significant trends a trend toward lower seizure freedom in both.

Conclusion: Patients with Late- onset epilepsy have an excellent chance of achieving seizure freedom, especially those controlled on 1 ASM and those with normal neuroimaging.

Purpose: Identification of potential biomarkers of seizures.

Methods: In this exploratory study, we quantified plasma protein intensities in 15 patients with recent seizures compared to 15 patients with long-standing seizure freedom. Using TMT-based proteomics we found fifty-one differentially expressed proteins.

Results: Network analyses including co-expression networks and protein-protein interaction networks, using the STRING database, followed by network centrality and modularity analyses revealed 22 protein modules, with one module showing a significant association with seizures. The protein-protein interaction network centered around this module identified a subnetwork of 125 proteins, grouped into four clusters. Notably, one cluster (mainly enriching inflammatory pathways and Gene Ontology terms) demonstrated the highest enrichment of known epilepsy-related genes.

Conclusion: Overall, our network-based approach identified a protein module linked with seizures. The module contained known markers of epilepsy and inflammation. The results also demonstrate the potential of network analysis in discovering new biomarkers for improved epilepsy management.

At present, little is known about the outcomes measured in studies assessing the effectiveness of treatments for adults with epilepsy. As part of a wider project developing a Core Outcome Set for clinical trials for adults with epilepsy, we summarised the current outcomes and measurement instruments used in completed phase III and IV clinical trials registered in the clinicaltrials.gov and International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) databases. Of the reviewed studies 104 were deemed eligible. The outcomes that were measured were recorded, and trial registry entries cross referenced against associated peer review publications. In total, 374 unique granular outcome terms were identified, which grouped into 45 outcome concepts across the following domains: seizures, cognitive/behavioural/psychiatric, sleep, general symptom, functional status / disability, emotional functioning, social functioning, delivery of care, life impact, trial processes, side effects / adverse events, pregnancy / offspring, and death. We identified evidence of outcome measurement heterogeneity, with just 10/45 outcome concepts measured in more than half of the identified studies. This association remained when assessing studies grouped by epilepsy chronicity (newly diagnosed vs. chronic/treatment refractory) and epilepsy classification (focal vs. other). These findings highlight the need for a Core Outcome Set for interventional studies for adults with epilepsy to improve consistency of outcome measurement and reporting.

Objective: FREEDOM (Study 342; NCT03201900) assessed the long-term treatment effect of perampanel monotherapy in adolescent and adult patients (12-74 years of age) with untreated focal-onset seizures (FOS), with or without focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures (FBTCS).

Methods: In the Core Study, after a 4-week Pretreatment Phase, perampanel was up-titrated to 4 mg/day during a 6-week Titration Period followed by a 26-week Maintenance Period. Patients experiencing seizure(s) during the 4-mg/day Maintenance Period could have perampanel up-titrated to 8 mg/day over 4 weeks then could enter the 26-week 8-mg/day Maintenance Period. Patients could enter Extension to continue treatment upon the completion of the Core Study. Seizure-freedom rates, time to seizure recurrence or withdrawal since the initiation of maintenance treatment, and safety outcomes were assessed.

Results: In FREEDOM, 89 patients who received ≥ 1 perampanel dose were included for safety assessments (Safety Analysis Set), and 73 of them entered the 4-‍‍‍mg/day Maintenance Period (the modified Intent-to-Treat Analysis set) with 21 patients having perampanel up-titrated to 8 mg/day; 46 patients entered Extension with 38 patients completing. Overall, 42/89 (47.2 %) patients had cumulative exposure to perampanel for > 52 weeks. Among patients who entered Extension, 52.2 % (n = 24/46; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 36.9, 67.1) remained seizure free for 52 weeks at perampanel 4 mg/day and 67.4 % (n = 31/46; 95 % CI 52.0, 80.5) at 4-8 mg/day. The cumulative probabilities of seizure recurrence and withdrawal at 4-8 mg/day over 52 weeks were 28.9 % (95 % CI 19.0, 42.4) and 43.8 % (95 % CI 33.4, 55.9), respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 74/89 (83.1 %) patients, with 9/89 (10.1 %) discontinuing because of TEAEs. Dizziness occurred in 34/89 (38.2 %) patients and was the most common event.

Conclusions: Patients with untreated FOS (with or without FBTCS) are able to maintain seizure freedom for up to 52 weeks with perampanel monotherapy at a dose of 4-8 mg/day. The tolerability profile was manageable, and the safety profile was consistent with previous findings.

Introduction: Medication-resistant epilepsy (MRE) is characterized by the failure of adequate trials of two antiseizure medications (ASMs). Numerous studies have shown that once two ASMs fail to control seizures, the likelihood of subsequent ASM regimens providing seizure control diminishes significantly. Recent clinical data on cenobamate (CNB) suggest it may offer higher rates of seizure freedom in MRE patients. This study aims to report real-world, single-center findings on the effectiveness and tolerability of CNB in treating MRE.

Methods: This retrospective study includes adult patients diagnosed with MRE and treated with CNB between 2020 and 2023 at The George Washington University (GWU). Data were collected from electronic medical records. Statistical analyses were conducted to evaluate CNB's impact on seizure control and patient outcomes.

Results: 121 patients with medication-resistant epilepsy (MRE) were prescribed cenobamate (CNB). After exclusions, 104 patients were included in the effectiveness analysis and 111 in the tolerability analysis. Results showed that 34.6 % of patients achieved seizure freedom for at least three months, with a mean duration of seizure freedom of 11 ( ± 7.9) months.

Significance: CNB use in a large population of more than 100 patients demonstrated impressive anti-seizure activity with a good proportion of patients with MRE achieving seizure freedom despite having failed multiple prior ASMs.