Epilepsy In Europe Research Articles

Does SANAD II help with gender-specific problems in epilepsy treatment?—English Version

AbstractGender-specific differences in the treatment of epilepsy are a continuous challenge in the choice of treatment. Earlier studies on antiseizure medication often only or predominantly included male patients. The establishment of pregnancy registries including girls and women of childbearing age with epilepsy in Europe and North America have given many more insights into the side effects as well the teratogenic effects of antiseizure medications (ASM) on their children. The SANAD II study provided essential new data on the clinical effectiveness as well as the cost-effectiveness of the most frequently used antiseizure medications in focal, generalized and unclassifiable epilepsies. These results were taken into account for the new revised guidelines of the German, Austrian and Swiss neurological societies on epilepsy treatment in adults; however, several aspects regarding the gender-specific choice of antiseizure medication remain controversial, especially the use of valproate in generalized epilepsy.

Driving regulations for epilepsy in Europe

BackgroundAcross Europe, there are differences regarding driving restrictions for patients with epilepsies and seizures. In the light of increasing mobility, knowledge about those different regulations is of high importance for counseling patients, and physicians. MethodsA structured online survey was sent to the official representatives of the different European ILAE chapters, asking for the local driving restrictions for patients with epilepsies, first seizures, syncopes, and psychogenic non-epileptic seizures. ResultsThe survey was sent to 38 chapters or representatives of 47 European Countries. 33 chapters answered. The majority of countries require 1 year of seizure-freedom for the ability to drive (Group 1, former categories A, B, B + E, F, G. H, K, L, and P; driving license which authorizes its holder to drive vehicle classes categories of the motor vehicle), usually with the need to continue antiseizure medication (ASM). Some countries have much stricter regulations before allowing for driving. Legal regulations after a first unprovoked seizure differ between 6 months for Group 1 license holders in most European countries, and one year in Luxembourg and Malta. In Serbia, there is no legal regulation for this special situation. The situation after a first seizure is even more complex for Group 2 license holders (former categories C1, C1+E, C, C + E, D1, D1+E, D, D + E). ConclusionKnowledge of the different recommendations of the individual European countries is of high relevance in the counseling of epilepsy patients. Europe-wide regulations, e.g. following the IBE-recommendations are needed to facilitate the patients’ situation.

Autism with co-occurring epilepsy care pathway in Europe.

Autism and epilepsy often occur together. Epilepsy and other associated conditions have a substantial impact on the well-being of autistic people and their families, reduce quality of life, and increase premature mortality. Despite this, there is a lack of studies investigating the care pathway of autistic children with co-occurring epilepsy in Europe. We analyzed the care pathway for autistic children with associated epilepsy in Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom from the perspective of caregivers (using a survey aimed at caregivers of autistic children 0-18years old), the autistic community, and professionals, in order to identify major barriers preventing caregivers and autistic children from receiving timely screening and treatment of possible co-occurring epilepsy. Across all three countries, an analysis of the current care pathway showed a lack of systematic screening of epilepsy in all autistic children, lack of treatment of co-occurring epilepsy, and inappropriate use of antiepileptic drugs. A major challenge is the lack of evidence-based harmonized guidelines for autism with co-occurring epilepsy in these countries. Our findings show both heterogeneity and major gaps in the care pathway for autism with associated epilepsy and the great efforts that caregivers must make for timely screening, diagnosis, and adequate management of epilepsy in autistic children. We call for policy harmonization in Europe in order to improve the experiences and quality of life of autistic people and their families.

OC01 : The art of matchmaking: What is the link between findings in MRI and intraoperative electrocorticography in patients with focal epilepsy?

Introduction: For 1.3-1.9 million patients suffering from drug-resistant focal epilepsy in Europe alone, neurosurgery is often the only path to seizure freedom. The delineation between healthy and epileptogenic tissue relies on MRI and other diagnostics and can be further refined through intraoperative electrocorticography (ioECoG). Complete removal of tissue generating interictal electric discharges (IEDs, <80Hz) and high frequency oscillations (HFOs, 80-500Hz) in ioECoG correlates with a good surgical outcome. The precise link between IEDs/HFOs and MRI lesions, however, is unknown. We aim to identify this link and improve our understanding of how ioECoG and MRI findings should be weighed against each other to accurately delineate epileptogentic tissue. Methods: We retrospectively included patients from the HFO Trial (Van ’t Klooster, 2015) who underwent ioECoG-tailored surgery for a single lesion and achieved seizure freedom (Engel 1a). All lesions and resection cavities were segmented based on pre- and postoperative MRI scans. We automatically detected and visually verified IEDs and HFOs in 1-minute ioECoG epochs. Using intraoperative photographs, the MRI-coordinates of all ioECoG electrodes were determined on a rendering of the cortical surface. Results: 33 patients met our inclusion criteria. We will compare the number and rate of IEDs and HFOs per electrode with the volume of, and distance from the MRI lesion and subsequent resection cavity. We aim to find underlying functional relationships between those variables through regression analyses to better integrate MRI and ioECoG in our current model for tissue delineation. Conclusions: This study is ongoing, results are expected by mid-year 2021.

The provision of epilepsy care across Europe 2017: A 17-year follow-up survey.

SummaryObjectiveTo assess the resources available in the provision of epilepsy care across Europe and the developments since the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) survey published in 2003 (data collected in 2000).MethodsAn updated online version of the European Epilepsy Services Inventory was distributed to all European chapters of the ILAE (N = 47) and responses were obtained from 33 chapters (response rate 70%). To assess trends and allow comparisons with the survey published in 2003, the responding countries were divided into 4 groups (Western, Central, Southern, and Eastern). Responses from European Union (EU) member states are reported as a subgroup (N = 23), since the current survey is a part of the EU‐funded European Study on the Burden and Care of Epilepsy (ESBACE, www.esbace.eu).ResultsThe total number of physicians involved in epilepsy care had increased since 2000, with the largest increase seen for neurologists. The gap between the best‐ and the least‐provided areas with regard to the competence of the providers had diminished. However, the density of comprehensive multidisciplinary epilepsy teams had not changed to any greater degree. The main problems reported by the chapters were to a large extent the same as in 2000 and included lack of specialists and specialist care, lack or underuse of epilepsy surgery, and problems regarding financing and resource allocation. Several chapters also highlighted problems with healthcare structure and organization.SignificanceAlthough there have been some improvements concerning the availability of care for people with epilepsy in Europe over the last 17 years, there are still a number of problem areas with little improvement or where there are important regional differences.

A discrete-choice experiment to elicit preferences of patients with epilepsy for self-management programs

BackgroundThere is an increasing number of self-management programs developed for patients with epilepsy, with the goal of supporting treatment management and improving their quality of life. With the aim of increasing medication adherence and effectiveness of self-management programs, it is important to design programs that are engaging to, and align with the preferences of patients with epilepsy. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the preferences of patients with epilepsy for self-management programs in three European countries. This is the first cross-border evaluation of the preferences of patients with epilepsy in Europe for such programs. MethodsUsing a discrete-choice experiment, patients with epilepsy from Germany, France, and the Netherlands were surveyed, and chose repetitively between two hypothetical self-management programs. These differed in the following six characteristics: i) the thematic area which would be the main focus of the program, ii) the method of interaction, iii) the source of information or provider of the program, iv) the amount of time spent on the program per week, v) the cost, and vi) whether the program would start immediately, or if there would be a delay of 3weeks before its initiation. A Bayesian efficient design was used to construct 15 choice sets, and a mixed panel logit model was used to estimate patients' preferences. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to socioeconomic status, burden of disease, and previous activation in self-management. ResultsA total of 299 people with epilepsy were included in the study, with a mean age of 45.5years. Only 15% had previously made use of a self-management program, although 44.5% reported having previously heard of them. In all three countries, all attributes barring the content were significant at 10%. The cost attribute – i.e., an out-of-pocket expenditure for a program – was reported as the most important feature in each country and across subgroups (significant at 1%). This was followed by the length of program sessions per week, which ranged from 20 to 90min per week. Although there was some heterogeneity between countries and subgroups, the patients, overall, had a preference for a face-to-face meeting with a doctor. In the Netherlands, a preference for online programs and physician assistants was observed when compared with the other countries. Other attributes, including the information source – whether a program was led by a physician, another patient with epilepsy, or another combination – was also important to patients, who appear willing to trade preferences in order to gain their favored attribute level. However, 20% of the population chose consistently to not participate in any self-management program. ConclusionGiven the heterogeneity of the epilepsies, preferences, and dispreferences across subgroups, our study highlights that if full account is not taken of different segmentation strategies when designing a self-management program, a large proportion of the population may not be attracted to it.

Epilepsy priorities in Europe: A report of the ILAE-IBE Epilepsy Advocacy Europe Task Force.

SummaryThe European Forum on Epilepsy Research (ERF2013), which took place in Dublin, Ireland, on May 26–29, 2013, was designed to appraise epilepsy research priorities in Europe through consultation with clinical and basic scientists as well as representatives of lay organizations and health care providers. The ultimate goal was to provide a platform to improve the lives of persons with epilepsy by influencing the political agenda of the EU. The Forum highlighted the epidemiologic, medical, and social importance of epilepsy in Europe, and addressed three separate but closely related concepts. First, possibilities were explored as to how the stigma and social burden associated with epilepsy could be reduced through targeted initiatives at EU national and regional levels. Second, ways to ensure optimal standards of care throughout Europe were specifically discussed. Finally, a need for further funding in epilepsy research within the European Horizon 2020 funding programme was communicated to politicians and policymakers participating to the forum. Research topics discussed specifically included (1) epilepsy in the developing brain; (2) novel targets for innovative diagnostics and treatment of epilepsy; (3) what is required for prevention and cure of epilepsy; and (4) epilepsy and comorbidities, with a special focus on aging and mental health. This report provides a summary of recommendations that emerged at ERF2013 about how to (1) strengthen epilepsy research, (2) reduce the treatment gap, and (3) reduce the burden and stigma associated with epilepsy.Half of the 6 million European citizens with epilepsy feel stigmatized and experience social exclusion, stressing the need for funding trans‐European awareness campaigns and monitoring their impact on stigma, in line with the global commitment of the European Commission and with the recommendations made in the 2011 Written Declaration on Epilepsy. Epilepsy care has high rates of misdiagnosis and considerable variability in organization and quality across European countries, translating into huge societal cost (0.2% GDP) and stressing the need for cost‐effective programs of harmonization and optimization of epilepsy care throughout Europe. There is currently no cure or prevention for epilepsy, and 30% of affected persons are not controlled by current treatments, stressing the need for pursuing research efforts in the field within Horizon 2020. Priorities should include (1) development of innovative biomarkers and therapeutic targets and strategies, from gene and cell‐based therapies to technologically advanced surgical treatment; (2) addressing issues raised by pediatric and aging populations, as well as by specific etiologies and comorbidities such as traumatic brain injury (TBI) and cognitive dysfunction, toward more personalized medicine and prevention; and (3) translational studies and clinical trials built upon well‐established European consortia.

International Veterinary Epilepsy Task Force consensus proposal: medical treatment of canine epilepsy in Europe.

In Europe, the number of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) licensed for dogs has grown considerably over the last years. Nevertheless, the same questions remain, which include, 1) when to start treatment, 2) which drug is best used initially, 3) which adjunctive AED can be advised if treatment with the initial drug is unsatisfactory, and 4) when treatment changes should be considered. In this consensus proposal, an overview is given on the aim of AED treatment, when to start long-term treatment in canine epilepsy and which veterinary AEDs are currently in use for dogs. The consensus proposal for drug treatment protocols, 1) is based on current published evidence-based literature, 2) considers the current legal framework of the cascade regulation for the prescription of veterinary drugs in Europe, and 3) reflects the authors’ experience. With this paper it is aimed to provide a consensus for the management of canine idiopathic epilepsy. Furthermore, for the management of structural epilepsy AEDs are inevitable in addition to treating the underlying cause, if possible.

Zonisamide in the management of epilepsy in the elderly.

Zonisamide (ZNS), a second-generation antiepileptic drug, indicated as add-on treatment of focal epilepsy, has been recently approved as monotherapy for the treatment of partial seizures in adults affected by newly diagnosed epilepsy in Europe. Evidence on the efficacy and tolerability of antiepileptic drugs in the elderly is still lacking as these patients are frequently excluded from clinical trials. Here, a comprehensive overview of available data regarding the use of ZNS in the treatment of epilepsy in elderly people is provided. In a pooled analysis conducted in patients aged ≥65 years, no new/unexpected safety findings have emerged. Few data from uncontrolled investigations suggest that ZNS may be effective and well tolerated when administered as monotherapy or adjunctive antiepileptic treatment in the elderly. However, evidence from these observational studies is less than satisfactory, and randomized controlled trials focused on these patients are still needed.

Abnormal ERD/ERS but Unaffected BOLD Response in Patients with Unverricht–Lundborg Disease During Index Extension: A Simultaneous EEG-fMRI Study

Electrophysiological studies indicate that Unverricht-Lundborg's disease (ULD), the most common form of progressive myoclonus epilepsy in Europe, is characterized by the involvement of multiple cortical regions in degenerative changes that lead to enhanced excitation and deficient inhibition. We searched for the haemodynamic correlates of these effects using functional MRI (fMRI) of self-paced index extensions, a well-accepted task highlighting significant differences. EEG and fMRI were simultaneously acquired in 11 ULD patients and 16 controls, performing the index extensions individually (event-related task) as well as repetitively (block task). ERD/ERS analysis was performed for the EEG data in the alpha and beta bands. fMRI time-series were analyzed using the traditional general linear model, as well as with an assumption-free approach, and by means of cross-region correlations representing functional connectivity. In line with the existing literature, ULD patients had enhanced desynchronization in the alpha band and reduced post-movement synchronization in the beta band. By contrast, fMRI did not reveal any difference between the two groups; there were no activation intensity, latency or extent effects, no significant engagement of additional regions, and no changes to functional connectivity. We conclude that, so long as the patients are executing a task which does not induce obvious action myoclonus, the hypothesized abnormalities in pyramidal neuron and interneuron dynamics are relatively subtle, embodied in processes which are not metabolically-demanding and take place at a time-scale invisible to fMRI.

Cost of Epilepsy

The objective of this review was to overview published cost-of-illness (COI) studies of epilepsy and their methodological approaches. Epilepsy imposes a substantial burden on individuals and society as a whole. The mean prevalence of epilepsy is estimated at 0.52% in Europe, 0.68% in the US, and peaks up to 1.5% in developing countries. Estimation of the economic burden of epilepsy is of pivotal relevance to enable a rational distribution of healthcare resources. This is especially so with the introduction of the newer antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), the marketing of vagal-nerve stimulators and the resurgence of new surgical treatment options, which have the potential to considerably increase the costs of treating epilepsy.A systematic literature review was performed to identify studies that evaluated direct and indirect costs of epilepsy. Using a standardized assessment form, information on the study design, methodological framework and data sources were extracted from each publication and systematically reported. We identified 22 studies worldwide on costs of epilepsy. The majority of the studies reflected the costs of epilepsy in Europe (three studies each for the UK and Italy, one study each for Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, France and the EU) and the US (four studies), but studies were also available from India (two), Hong Kong, Oman, Burundi, Chile and Mexico. The studies utilized different frameworks to evaluate costs. All used a bottom-up approach; however, only 12 studies (55%) evaluated direct as well as indirect costs. The range for the mean annual direct costs lay between 40 International Dollar purchasing power parities (PPP-$) in rural Burundi and PPP-$4748 (adjusted to 2006 values) in a German epilepsy centre. Recent studies suggest AEDs are becoming the main contributor to direct costs. The mean indirect costs ranged between 12% and 85% of the total annual costs. Epilepsy is a cost-intensive disorder. A reliable comparison of the different COI studies in epilepsy is not easily feasible, as the evaluated studies show substantial methodological differences with respect to their patient selection criteria, diagnostic stratifications and evaluated costs. Therefore, there is an urgent need for studies that evaluate direct and indirect costs in a standardized fashion.

Estimating the Cost of Epilepsy in Europe: A Review with Economic Modeling

Based on available epidemiologic, health economic, and international population statistics literature, the cost of epilepsy in Europe was estimated. Europe was defined as the 25 European Union member countries, Iceland, Norway, and Switzerland. Guidelines for epidemiological studies on epilepsy were used for a case definition. A bottom-up prevalence-based cost-of-illness approach, the societal perspective for including the cost items, and the human capital approach as valuation principle for indirect costs were used. The cost estimates were based on selected studies with common methodology and valuation principles. The estimated prevalence of epilepsy in Europe in 2004 was 4.3-7.8 per 1,000. The estimated total cost of the disease in Europe was euro15.5 billion in 2004, indirect cost being the single most dominant cost category (euro8.6 billion). Direct health care costs were euro2.8 billion, outpatient care comprising the largest part (euro1.3 billion). Direct nonmedical cost was euro4.2 billion. That of antiepileptic drugs was euro400 million. The total cost per case was euro2,000-11,500 and the estimated cost per European inhabitant was euro33. Epilepsy is a relevant socioeconomic burden at individual, family, health services, and societal level in Europe. The greater proportion of such burden is outside the formal health care sector, antiepileptic drugs representing a smaller proportion. Lack of economic data from several European countries and other methodological limitations make this report an initial estimate of the cost of epilepsy in Europe. Prospective incidence cost-of-illness studies from well-defined populations and common methodology are encouraged.

Zonisamide for the treatment of epilepsy

The availability of new antiepileptic drugs with different mechanisms of action has widened our therapeutic choice, allowing better tailoring of treatment regimens to address specific needs. Zonisamide is the latest addition to the pharmacological management of epilepsy in Europe, following extensive clinical experience in Japan and the USA. This article reviews the structure, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics and drug interactions of zonisamide. The four double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in patients with drug-resistant focal seizures are also presented. They complement pre- and postmarketing studies conducted in Japan and provide clear-cut evidence that the drug has efficacy as an add-on treatment in this indication. Reports on zonisamide monotherapy and on the use of the drug for the control of several types of seizures (typical and atypical absences, tonic and myoclonic) and syndromes in children and adults are also commented on. These were all open-label studies, as is often the case with other antiepileptic drugs, dealing with treatment of epilepsy in children. The Japanese, US and European data provide a large database of safety information suggesting that the drug is well tolerated with mild-to-moderate adverse events (e.g., somnolence and dizziness). Nephrolithiasis appears to have a very low incidence and cutaneous reactions are rare. The available data provide an excellent foundation on which clinicians can build their knowledge on this drug, although the broad-spectrum efficacy of zonisamide needs to be confirmed through randomized trials.

Introduction to zonisamide

Zonisamide (Zonegran ®), a novel antiepileptic drug (AED) approved recently in Europe as adjunctive therapy for refractory partial seizures in adults, has been used extensively in Japan and the United States. A substantial body of clinical experience has accumulated over a 14-year period, allowing the properties and pharmacologic/clinical profiles of zonisamide to be clearly defined. Zonisamide is structurally distinct from other AEDs and has multiple and complementary mechanisms of action, which likely contribute to its efficacy across a broad range of epilepsy types. Zonisamide has a long T 1/2 enabling once-daily dosing, linear pharmacokinetics and minimal interaction with other drugs; plasma levels of commonly administered AEDs and oral contraceptives are unaffected by concomitant zonisamide. Effective control of partial seizures (up to 51% decrease in seizure frequency) is attained at doses of ≥300 mg/day, and optimal titration and maintenance dosing schedules have been established. The adverse event profile is well defined; in common with most AEDs, most adverse events are central nervous system-related (e.g. somnolence, dizziness, tiredness). Adverse events may be minimised with appropriate patient management. Zonisamide therefore has many characteristics considered desirable in an AED and represents a valuable addition to the therapeutic options for treating epilepsy in Europe.

Cost of epilepsy in Europe

Cost of epilepsy in Europe

The epidemiology of epilepsy in Europe – a systematic review

Population-based epidemiological studies on epilepsy are available mainly from the UK and the Nordic, Baltic and western Mediterranean countries. No studies were identified from large areas of Europe, especially from the former eastern Europe (except the Baltic countries) and the eastern Mediterranean countries. Based on the prevalence of epilepsy in different studies and accounting for incomplete case identification the estimated number of children and adolescents in Europe with active epilepsy is 0.9 million (prevalence 4.5-5.0 per 1000), 1.9 million in ages 20-64 years (prevalence six per 1000) and 0.6 million in ages 65 years and older (prevalence seven per 1000). Approximately 20-30% of the epilepsy population have more than one seizure per month. Based on the age-specific incidence rates in European studies, the estimated number of new cases per year amongst European children and adolescents is 130,000 (incidence rate 70 per 100,000), 96,000 in adults 20-64 years (incidence rate 30 per 100,000) and 85,000 in the elderly 65 years and older (incidence 100 per 100,000). The proportion of both new and established cases with epilepsy in the young, adults and elderly in individual countries may differ substantially from total European distribution because of differences in age structure.

Needs for Children with Epilepsy in Europe

Needs for Children with Epilepsy in Europe

Epidemiology

Epidemiology

Provision of Care

Provision of Care

Economic Aspects of Epilepsy

Economic Aspects of Epilepsy