Seizures In People Research Articles

Treatment with brivaracetam has no apparent long-term effects on body weight in pediatric patients with epilepsy.

The objective of this study is to evaluate possible long-term effects of treatment with brivaracetam (BRV) on body weight in children with epilepsy. Post hoc analysis of data from patients (aged 1 month to <17 years) with ≥6 months of BRV treatment in a long-term, open-label trial (N01266 [NCT01364597]). Outcomes included body weight and body mass index (BMI) over time (z-score growth curves), and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Previous/ongoing medical conditions that may affect body weight (gastrointestinal and metabolic/nutritional disorders); concomitant antiseizure medications (ASMs) were also evaluated. Two hundred nine patients (mean [standard deviation] age 7.9 [4.6] years) were analyzed. Most (154 [73.7%]) had focal-onset seizures. At study initiation, median (range) BRV dose was 1.0 (0.4-7.5) mg/kg/day. Overall, 189 (90.4%) patients had a previous or ongoing medical condition (gastrointestinal disorders: 43 [20.6%]; metabolism/nutritional disorders: 26 [12.4%]). Most patients followed z-score curves for body weight and BMI during BRV treatment, although there were outliers in both directions. Incidences of appetite/weight-change TEAEs were low. Twenty-three (11.0%) patients had a TEAE of decreased appetite and 14 (6.7%) had a TEAE of weight decreased. Long-term adjunctive BRV was well tolerated in growing children with no indication of detrimental effects on body weight. Brivaracetam is an antiseizure medication (ASM) used to treat seizures in people with epilepsy. Some ASMs can lead to changes in people's appetite and weight. Knowing the effect a drug has on appetite and weight is particularly important in children. We looked at 209 children with epilepsy taking brivaracetam and studied changes in their body weight and body mass index over time. The number of reported side effects related to appetite or weight change was low. There was no apparent long-term effect on their body weight, even when taking their medical history and use of other ASMs into account.

Hippocampal network activity forecasts epileptic seizures.

Seizures in people with epilepsy were long thought to occur at random, but recent methods for seizure forecasting enable estimation of the likelihood of seizure occurrence over short horizons. These methods rely on days-long cyclical patterns of brain electrical activity and other physiological variables that determine seizure likelihood and that require measurement through long-term, multimodal recordings. In this retrospective cohort study of 15 adults with bitemporal epilepsy who had a device that provides chronic intracranial recordings, functional connectivity of hippocampal networks fluctuated in multiday cycles with patterns that mirrored cycles of seizure likelihood. A functional connectivity biomarker of seizure likelihood derived from 90-s recordings of background hippocampal activity generalized across individuals and forecasted 24-h seizure likelihood as accurately as cycle-based models requiring months-long baseline recordings. Larger, prospective studies are needed to validate this approach, but our results have the potential to make reliable seizure forecasts accessible to more people with epilepsy.

Effectiveness and Safety of Adjunctive Cenobamate in People with Focal-Onset Epilepsy: Evidence from the First Interim Analysis of the BLESS Study.

Despite new anti-seizure medications (ASMs) being introduced into clinical practice, about one-third of people with epilepsy do not reach seizure control. Cenobamate is a novel tetrazole-derived carbamate compound with a dual mechanism of action. In randomized controlled trials, adjunctive cenobamate reduced the frequency of focal seizures in people with uncontrolled epilepsy. Studies performed in real-world settings are useful to complement this evidence and better characterize the drug profile. The Italian BLESS ("Cenobamate in Adults With Focal-Onset Seizures") study is an observational cohort study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness, tolerability, and safety of adjunctive cenobamate in adults with uncontrolled focal epilepsy in the context of real-world clinical practice. The study is ongoing and conducted at 50 centers in Italy. This first interim analysis includes participants enrolled until June 2023 and with 12-week outcome data available. Forty participants with a median age of 36.5 (interquartile range [IQR] 26.0-47.5) years were included. The median monthly seizure frequency at baseline was 6.0 (IQR 2.5-17.3) seizures and 31 (77.5%) participants had failed four or more ASMs before cenobamate. At 12 weeks from starting cenobamate, the median reduction in monthly seizure frequency was 52.8% (IQR 27.1-80.3%); 22 (55.0%) participants had a ≥ 50% reduction in baseline seizure frequency and six (15.0%) reached seizure freedom. The median number of concomitant ASMs decreased from 3 (IQR 2-3) at baseline to 2 (IQR 2-3) at 12 weeks and the proportion of patients treated with > 2 concomitant ASMs decreased from 52.5% to 40.0%. Seven (17.5%) patients reported a total of 12 adverse events, 11 of which were considered adverse drug reactions to cenobamate. In adults with uncontrolled focal seizures, the treatment with adjunctive cenobamate was well tolerated and was associated with improved seizure control and a reduction of the burden of concomitant ASMs. NCT05859854 (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier).

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of adjunctive brivaracetam in adult Asian patients with uncontrolled focal-onset seizures: A phase III randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Evaluate efficacy, safety, and tolerability of adjunctive brivaracetam (BRV) in adult Asian patients with focal-onset seizures (FOS). Phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (EP0083; NCT03083665) evaluating BRV 50 mg/day and 200 mg/day in patients (≥16-80 years) with FOS with/without secondary generalization (focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizures) despite current treatment with 1 or 2 concomitant antiseizure medications. Following an 8-week baseline, patients were randomized 1:1:1 to placebo, BRV 50 mg/day, or BRV 200 mg/day, and entered a 12-week treatment period. Efficacy outcomes: percent reduction over placebo in 28-day FOS frequency (primary); 50% responder rate in FOS frequency; median percent reduction in FOS frequency from baseline; seizure freedom during treatment period (secondary). Primary safety endpoints: incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs); TEAEs leading to discontinuation; serious TEAEs. In this study, 448/449 randomized patients (mean age, 34.5 years; 53.8% female) received ≥1 dose of study medication (placebo/BRV 50 mg/BRV 200 mg/day: n = 149/151/148). Percent reduction over placebo in 28-day adjusted FOS frequency was 24.5% (p = 0.0005) and 33.4% (p < 0.0001) with BRV 50 mg/day and 200 mg/day, respectively, 50% responder rate was 19.0%, 41.1%, and 49.3% with placebo, BRV 50 mg/day, and BRV 200 mg/day, respectively (p < 0.0001 for both BRV groups vs. placebo). Median percent reduction in FOS frequency from baseline was 21.3%/38.9%/46.7% in patients on placebo/BRV 50 mg/BRV 200 mg/day, respectively. Overall, 0, 7 (4.6%), and 10 (6.8%) patients were classified as seizure-free during the treatment period on placebo, BRV 50 mg/day, and BRV 200 mg/day, respectively (p = 0.0146/p = 0.0017 for BRV 50 mg/200 mg/day vs. placebo, respectively). TEAE incidences were similar between patients on placebo (58.4%) and all patients receiving BRV (58.5%); TEAE incidences for BRV 50 mg/day and BRV 200 mg/day were 57.0% and 60.1%, respectively. Overall, 0.7% of patients on placebo and 2.0% of all patients on BRV reported serious TEAEs (incidences for BRV 50 mg/day and BRV 200 mg/day were 1.3% and 2.7%, respectively), 20.1% of patients on placebo and 33.1% of all patients on BRV reported drug-related TEAEs (incidences for BRV 50 mg/day and BRV 200 mg/day were 26.5% and 39.9%, respectively), and 4.7% of patients on placebo and 3.0% of all patients on BRV discontinued due to TEAEs (discontinuation incidences for BRV 50 mg/day and BRV 200 mg/day were 2.6% and 3.4%, respectively). Adjunctive BRV was efficacious and well tolerated in adult Asian patients with FOS. Efficacy and safety profiles were consistent with BRV studies in predominantly non-Asian populations. Brivaracetam is used to treat partial or focal seizures in people with epilepsy. Most studies with brivaracetam tablets have involved people from non-Asian racial backgrounds. In this study, 449 Asian adults with epilepsy took part. One third took 50 mg of brivaracetam, one third took 200 mg of brivaracetam, and one third took a placebo each day for 12 weeks. On average, those who took brivaracetam had fewer seizures than those given the placebo. Most of the side effects were mild and the number and type of side effects seen were as expected for this medication.

Epileptic Seizures in People with HIV- Related Toxoplasmosis and Other Cerebral Disorders

Epileptic Seizures in People with HIV- Related Toxoplasmosis and Other Cerebral Disorders

Conversion to Brivaracetam Monotherapy in Clinical Practice: A Retrospective Study.

The study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of brivaracetam (BRV) as conversion monotherapy in adults with focal epilepsy treated in the context of real-world clinical practice. This was a retrospective, observational, non-interventional study in adults with focal epilepsy who converted to BRV monotherapy following the withdrawal of background antiseizure medications (ASMs). Primary effectiveness outcome was the retention rate of BRV as single ASM at 6 and 12months. Secondary outcomes included the 6- and 12-month rates of seizure freedom. Safety and tolerability outcomes included the frequency and type of adverse events (AEs) and the occurrence of treatment discontinuation due to AEs. A total of 44 participants with a median age of 63.5 (interquartile range 44-73.5) years were included; 17 subjects were seizure free at baseline, and 9 of them switched from levetiracetam because of lack of tolerability. The retention rate of BRV monotherapy was 88.6% (39/44) at 6months and 83.9% (26/31) at 12months. The rates of seizure freedom were 72.7% (32/44) in subjects with 6-month follow-up and 58.1% (18/31) in subjects with 12-month follow-up. The median maintenance dosage of BRV monotherapy was 150 (100-200) mg/day at 6months and 125 (100-200) mg/day in subjects with 12-month follow-up. Adverse events were recorded in 6/44 (13.6%) participants and led to BRV discontinuation in 2/44 (4.5%) cases. The reported AEs were somnolence (n = 3), fatigue (n = 2), and irritability (n = 1); no serious AEs were experienced. In 21/44 (47.7%) participants, BRV monotherapy resulted from the direct switch from levetiracetam. The rates of treatment retention and seizure freedom at 6 and 12months were higher among people who switched from levetiracetam to BRV monotherapy. Brivaracetam may be a valuable treatment of focal seizures in people who converted to monotherapy in a real-life setting.

Effect of A. graveolens hydroalcoholic extract on epilepsy-related damaging of Sox2 gene expression in embryos of epileptic mothers

BackgroundAnethum graveolens is a plant species belonging to the Apiaceae family that is commonly found in southwestern Asia (Iran-Khorasan province) and southeastern Europe. Previous studies have shown that A. graveolens extract may have anticonvulsant properties, reducing the frequency or severity of seizures in people with epilepsy. To better understand the mechanism behind how A. graveolens extract improves epilepsy, this study investigated the effects of the hydroalcoholic extract of A. graveolens leaves on the expression of the sox2 gene in the embryos of pregnant, epileptic mice. Sox2 is a transcription factor that plays a crucial role in the development of the nervous system, and its dysregulation has been implicated in various neurological disorders, including epilepsy. By examining the effects of A. graveolens extract on the expression of sox2 in embryonic epileptic mice, this study aimed to provide insights into the potential therapeutic benefits of this natural remedy for epilepsy. MethodsSixty BALB/c mice aged 6–8 weeks and weighing 25–30 g were used for this experiment. Four groups of 12 mice each were randomly selected from fully kindled pregnant mice. A. graveolens extract was administered intraperitoneally for 13 days to three experimental groups at doses of 100, 200, and 400 mg/kg/day, while the control group was given PBS. Following the final injection and completion of the protocol, mice were anesthetized with ether, and the heads of pregnant mice were cut to dissect prenatal mouse brains. Tissues were cut and immediately placed in RNA Later (QIAGEN) solution under sterile conditions for RNA extraction and analysis of sox2 gene expression. ResultsThe expression of the SOX2 gene was significantly reduced in the embryos of pregnant, epileptic mice compared to healthy controls and PBS group (P < 0.05) and (P < 0.0001), respectively. Additionally, intraperitoneal injections of 100 mg/kg/day of A. graveolens for 13 days significantly increased the expression of the sox2 gene in the embryos of pregnant epileptic mice. A similar effect was observed with 200 and 400 mg/kg/day of the extract, but it was less pronounced. Therefore, 100 mg/kg/day of A. graveolens may be optimal for exerting its protective effect on the brain expression of sox2 in embryonic epileptic mice. ConclusionsBased on the findings of this study, A. graveolens hydroalcoholic extract inhibits epilepsy-related damaging effects on Sox2 gene expression in the embryos of epileptic mothers.

Cost-effectiveness of cenobamate for focal seizures in people with drug-resistant epilepsy.

This study was undertaken to estimate the cost-effectiveness of add-on cenobamate in the UK when used to treat drug-resistant focal seizures in adults who are not adequately controlled with at least two prior antiseizure medications, including at least one used adjunctively. We estimated the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for cenobamate compared to brivaracetam, eslicarbazepine, lacosamide, and perampanel in the UK National Health Service over a lifetime time horizon. We used a Markov cohort structure to determine response to treatment, using pooled data from three long-term studies of cenobamate. A network meta-analysis informed the likelihood of response to therapy with brivaracetam, eslicarbazepine, lacosamide, and perampanel relative to cenobamate. Once individuals discontinued treatment, they transitioned to subsequent treatment health states, including other antiseizure medicines, surgery, and vagus nerve stimulation. Costs included treatment, administration, routine monitoring, event management, and adverse events. Published evidence and expert opinion informed the likelihood of response to subsequent treatments, associated adverse events, and costs. Utility data were based on Short-Form six-dimension form utility. Discounting was applied at 3.5% per annum as per National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance. Uncertainty was explored through deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. In the base case, cenobamate led to cost savings of £51 967 (compared to brivaracetam), £21 080 (compared to eslicarbazepine), £33 619 (compared to lacosamide), and £28 296 (compared to perampanel) and increased QALYs of 1.047 (compared to brivaracetam), 0.598 (compared to eslicarbazepine), 0.776 (compared to lacosamide), and 0.703 (compared to perampanel) per individual over a lifetime time horizon. Cenobamate also dominated the four drugs across most sensitivity analyses. Differences were due to reduced seizure frequency with cenobamate relative to comparators. Cenobamate improved QALYs and was less costly than brivaracetam, eslicarbazepine, lacosamide, and perampanel. Therefore, cenobamate may be considered as a cost-effective adjunctive antiseizure medication for people with drug-resistant focal seizures.

Antiepileptic drugs for treating seizures in people with brain tumours

Objectives This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (intervention). The objectives are as follows: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) taken as monotherapy or add‐on therapy for seizures in people with brain tumours.

A systems medicine strategy to predict the efficacy of drugs for monogenic epilepsies.

Monogenic epilepsies are rare but often severe. Because of their rarity, they are neglected by traditional drug developers. Hence, many lack effective treatments. Treatments for a disease can be discovered more quickly and economically by computationally predicting drugs that can be repurposed for it. We aimed to create a computational method to predict the efficacy of drugs for monogenic epilepsies, and to use the method to predict drugs for Dravet syndrome, as (1) it is the archetypal monogenic catastrophic epilepsy; (2) few antiseizure medications are efficacious in Dravet syndrome; and (3) predicting the effect of drugs on Dravet syndrome is challenging, because Dravet syndrome is typically caused by an SCN1A mutation, but some antiseizure medications that are efficacious in Dravet syndrome do not affect SCN1A, and some antiseizure medications that affect SCN1A aggravate seizures in Dravet syndrome. We have devised a computational method to predict drugs that could be repurposed for a monogenic epilepsy, based on a combined measure of drugs' effects upon (1) the function of the disease's causal gene and other genes predicted to influence its phenotype, (2) the transcriptomic dysregulation induced by the casual gene mutation, and (3) clinical phenotypes. Our method correctly predicts drugs that are more effective, less effective, ineffective, and aggravating for seizures in people with Dravet syndrome. Our method correctly predicts the positive "hits" from large-scale screening of compounds in an animal model of Dravet syndrome. We predict the relative efficacy of 1462 drugs. At least 38 drugs are ranked higher than one or more of the antiseizure drugs currently used for Dravet syndrome and have existing evidence of antiseizure efficacy in animal models. Our predictions are a novel resource for identifying new treatments for seizures in Dravet syndrome, and our method can be adapted for other monogenic epilepsies.

Myoclonus as a Manifestation of Reflex Seizures.

Myoclonus is a motor symptom commonly associated with reflex seizures in people with idiopathic generalized epilepsies. The most frequently observed triggers of myoclonus are related to visual stimuli, including flashing lights or patterns; nonetheless, myoclonus can also be activated by movement, speech or reading, calculations, and praxis. Reflex myoclonic seizures may be the hallmark of a reflex epilepsy, but it may lead to the diagnosis of generalized epilepsy syndromes. In the setting of idiopathic generalized epilepsies, reflex myoclonus can persist despite optimal medical therapies and may be a marker for active, even medically intractable, epilepsy. In this article, the clinical significance, diagnosis, and treatment of myoclonus, associated with visual stimulation, movement, and praxis, will be reviewed.

Can Old Animals Reveal New Targets? The Aging and Degenerating Brain as a New Precision Medicine Opportunity for Epilepsy.

Older people represent the fastest growing group with epilepsy diagnosis. For example, cerebrovascular disease may underlie roughly 30–50% of epilepsy in older adults and seizures are also an underrecognized comorbidity of Alzheimer's disease (AD). As a result, up to 10% of nursing home residents may take antiseizure medicines (ASMs). Despite the greater incidence of epilepsy in older individuals and increased risk of comorbid seizures in people with AD, aged animals with seizures are strikingly underrepresented in epilepsy drug discovery practice. Increased integration of aged animals into preclinical epilepsy drug discovery could better inform the potential tolerability and pharmacokinetic interactions in aged individuals as the global population becomes increasingly older. Quite simply, the ASMs on the market today were brought forth based on efficacy in young adult, neurologically intact rodents; preclinical information concerning the efficacy and safety of promising ASMs is not routinely evaluated in aged animals. Integrating aged animals more often into basic epilepsy research may also uncover novel treatments for hyperexcitability. For example, cannabidiol and fenfluramine demonstrated clear efficacy in syndrome-specific pediatric models that led to a paradigm shift in the perceived value of pediatric models for ASM discovery practice; aged rodents with seizures or rodents with aging-related neuropathology represent an untapped resource that could similarly change epilepsy drug discovery. This review, therefore, summarizes how aged rodent models have thus far been used for epilepsy research, what studies have been conducted to assess ASM efficacy in aged rodent seizure and epilepsy models, and lastly to identify remaining gaps to engage aging-related neurological disease models for ASM discovery, which may simultaneously reveal novel mechanisms associated with epilepsy.

Are COVID-19 vaccines safe for people with epilepsy? A cross-sectional study.

BackgroundCOVID-19 disease was first seen in December 2019 and was declared a pandemic soon after. To fight the pandemic, there is an immense need for effective vaccines. The purposes of our study were to investigate the effect of coronavirus vaccines on seizures in people with epilepsy (PWE) and assess the adverse events of COVID-19 vaccine in PWE.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional study. We included epilepsy patients who got vaccinated with two or three doses at least 1 month earlier. We gathered the data using a standardized form. The form contained questions about patients’ demographic features, clinical features, and information about the vaccination and its adverse events. The questionnaire included questions about epilepsy-related adverse events.ResultsWe included 178 people with epilepsy in our study. The frequency of adverse events was lower than clinical studies of the vaccines. The mean number of seizures in the month before the vaccination was 1.62, between the doses was 1.61, and after vaccination was 1.64. There was no significant difference in the number of monthly seizures before the vaccination, the month between the doses, or the month after the vaccination (p = 0.46).ConclusionsThe vaccines under consideration in our study were tolerated well by the epilepsy patients. The vaccines did not affect the monthly number of seizures of the PWE. A small number of patients had more seizures than normal after vaccination. We think that benefits of the vaccines outweigh the slightly increased possibility of having a seizure after vaccination.

Antiepileptic drugs for the primary and secondary prevention of seizures after stroke.

Seizures after stroke are an important clinical problem and may result in poor outcomes. The indications of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) for seizure prophylaxis after stroke remain unclear. This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review previously published in 2014. To assess the effects of AEDs for the primary and secondary prevention of seizures after stroke. For primary prevention, we aimed to assess whether AEDs reduce the likelihood of seizures in people who have a stroke but do not have a seizure. For secondary prevention, we aimed to assess whether AEDs reduce the likelihood of further seizures in people who have a stroke and at least one post-stroke seizure. We searched the following databases on 9 March 2021: Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to March 08, 2021). CRS Web includes randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialised Registers of Cochrane Review Groups including Epilepsy and Stroke. We also checked the reference lists of articles retrieved from these searches. We selected randomised and quasi-randomised controlled studies that recruited participants with a clinical diagnosis of stroke, either ischaemic or haemorrhagic. We excluded studies that only recruited participants with subarachnoid haemorrhage, subdural haemorrhage, extradural haemorrhage, or other non-stroke diagnoses such as tumour- or infection-related infarction or haemorrhage. We also excluded studies that recruited only participants who had undergone neurosurgery. We included participants of all ages suffering any seizure type who were assigned to AEDs or placebo groups. In accordance with standard methodological procedures expected by The Cochrane Collaboration, two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion before evaluating trial risk of bias and extracting relevant data. The primary outcome assessed was the proportion of participants who experienced seizures in the follow-up period. We presented results as summary risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs for continuous outcomes. Where we had sufficient data, we calculated random-effects (Mantel-Haenszel) meta-analyses for dichotomous outcomes; otherwise, we reported results narratively. We used the I2 statistic to analyse statistical heterogeneity. We planned to use funnel plots to assess publication bias in meta-analyses with at least 10 included studies. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. Two studies with a total of 856 subjects were included. AEDs were not shown to be effective in primary prophylaxis of post-stroke seizure (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.26; 2 studies, 856 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The first study was a randomised double-blind study comparing valproic acid with placebo for primary seizure prevention up to one year after stroke. The study included 72 adults with intracerebral haemorrhage. There was no difference in the risk of post-stroke seizures (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.16) or of death (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.40 to 3.58). The second study was a substudy on the use of diazepam in acute stroke. It was a randomised double-blind study, comparing a three-day diazepam treatment versus placebo for primary seizure prevention up to three months after stroke in 784 adults with acute stroke. There was no evidence of a difference in the risk of post-stroke seizures for all stroke or subgroups of haemorrhagic or ischaemic stroke (RR for all stroke 0.47, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.22). In a subgroup analysis of anterior circulation cortical infarcts, primary prophylaxis with diazepam was associated with a reduced risk of post-stroke seizures (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.95). Risks of mortality did not differ between the diazepam and the placebo group at two weeks (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.26) and three months follow-up (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.26). We assessed both studies to be at a low overall risk of bias. Using the GRADE approach, we assessed the overall certainty of the evidence as low to moderate. There is insufficient evidence to support the routine use of AEDs on the primary and secondary prevention of seizures after stroke. Further well-conducted studies are warranted for this important clinical problem.

Anticholinergic Burden and Risk of Seizures in People with Dementia: Self-Controlled Case Series

Anticholinergic Burden and Risk of Seizures in People with Dementia: Self-Controlled Case Series

Vagus nerve stimulation therapy in people with drug-resistant epilepsy (CORE-VNS): rationale and design of a real-world post-market comprehensive outcomes registry

IntroductionThe Vagus Nerve Stimulation Therapy System (VNS Therapy) is an adjunctive neuromodulatory therapy that can be efficacious in reducing the frequency and severity of seizures in people with drug-resistant epilepsy...

Antiepileptic drugs for seizure control in people with neurocysticercosis.

Neurocysticercosis is the most common parasitic infection of the brain. Epilepsy is the most common clinical presentation, though people may also present with headache, symptoms of raised intracranial pressure, hydrocephalus, and ocular symptoms depending upon the localisation of the parasitic cysts. Anthelmintic drugs, antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), and anti-oedema drugs, such as steroids, form the mainstay of treatment. This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review previously published in 2019. To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of AEDs for the primary and secondary prevention of seizures in people with neurocysticercosis. For the question of primary prevention, we examined whether AEDs reduce the likelihood of seizures in people who had neurocysticercosis but had not had a seizure. For the question of secondary prevention, we examined whether AEDs reduce the likelihood of further seizures in people who had had at least one seizure due to neurocysticercosis. As part of primary prevention studies, we also aimed to examine which AED was beneficial in people with neurocysticercosis in terms of duration, dose, and side-effect profile. For the 2021 update of this review, we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), MEDLINE, and LILACS to January 2021. CRS Web includes randomised or quasi-randomised, controlled trials from CENTRAL, the Specialised Registers of Cochrane Review Groups, including Epilepsy, PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We also checked the reference lists of identified studies, and contacted experts and colleagues in the field to search for additional and ongoing studies. Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials. Single-blind, double-blind, or unblinded studies were eligible for inclusion. We followed standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Two review authors independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted the relevant data. The primary outcomes of interest were: proportion of individuals experiencing seizures, and time to first seizure post randomisation. Secondary outcomes included: seizure freedom, number of withdrawals, side effects, number of people seizure free with short or long durations of treatment, quality of life, therapy costs, hospitalisations, and mortality. We used an intention-to-treat analysis for the primary analysis. We calculated odds ratio (OR) for dichotomous data (proportion of individuals who experienced seizures, were seizure free for a specific time period (12 or 24 months), withdrew from treatment, developed drug-related side effects or complications, were seizure-free with each treatment policy, mortality), and planned to use mean difference (MD) for continuous data, if any continuous data were identified (quality of life, cost of treatment). We intended to evaluate time to first seizure after randomisation by calculating hazard ratios (HRs). We assessed precision using 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We stratified the analysis by treatment comparison. We also considered the duration of drug usage, co-medications, and the length of follow-up. We did not find any trials that investigated the role of AEDs in preventing seizures among people with neurocysticercosis, presenting with symptoms other than seizures. We did not find any trials that directly compared individual AEDs for primary prevention in people with neurocysticercosis. We included four trials that evaluated the efficacy of short-term versus longer-term AED treatment for people with solitary neurocysticercosis (identified on computed tomography (CT) scan) who presented with seizures. In total, 466 people were enrolled. These studies compared AED treatment durations of 6, 12, and 24 months. The risk of seizure recurrence with six months of treatment compared with 12 to 24 months of treatment was inconclusive (odds ratio (OR) 1.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73 to 2.47; three studies, 360 participants; low-certainty evidence). The risk of seizure recurrence with six to 12 months of treatment compared with 24 months of treatment was inconclusive (OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.57; three studies, 385 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Two studies compared seizure recurrence with CT findings, and suggested that persistent and calcified lesions had a higher recurrence risk, and suggest longer duration of treatment with AEDs. One study reported no side effects, while the rest did not comment on side effects of the drugs. None of the studies addressed the quality of life of the participants. These studies had methodological deficiencies, such as small sample sizes, and a possibility of bias due to lack of blinding, which affect the results of the review. Despite neurocysticercosis being the most common cause of epilepsy worldwide, there is currently no evidence available regarding the use of AEDs as seizure prophylaxis among people presenting with symptoms other than seizures. For those presenting with seizures, there is no reliable evidence regarding the duration of treatment required. Therefore, there is a need for large scale randomised controlled trials to address these questions.

Performance of ECG‐based seizure detection algorithms strongly depends on training and test conditions

ObjectiveTo identify non‐EEG‐based signals and algorithms for detection of motor and non‐motor seizures in people lying in bed during video‐EEG (VEEG) monitoring and to test whether these algorithms work in freely moving people during mobile EEG recordings.MethodsData of three groups of adult people with epilepsy (PwE) were analyzed. Group 1 underwent VEEG with additional devices (accelerometry, ECG, electrodermal activity); group 2 underwent VEEG; and group 3 underwent mobile EEG recordings both including one‐lead ECG. All seizure types were analyzed. Feature extraction and machine‐learning techniques were applied to develop seizure detection algorithms. Performance was expressed as sensitivity, precision, F 1 score, and false positives per 24 hours.ResultsThe algorithms were developed in group 1 (35 PwE, 33 seizures) and achieved best results (F 1 score 56%, sensitivity 67%, precision 45%, false positives 0.7/24 hours) when ECG features alone were used, with no improvement by including accelerometry and electrodermal activity. In group 2 (97 PwE, 255 seizures), this ECG‐based algorithm largely achieved the same performance (F 1 score 51%, sensitivity 39%, precision 73%, false positives 0.4/24 hours). In group 3 (30 PwE, 51 seizures), the same ECG‐based algorithm failed to meet up with the performance in groups 1 and 2 (F 1 score 27%, sensitivity 31%, precision 23%, false positives 1.2/24 hours). ECG‐based algorithms were also separately trained on data of groups 2 and 3 and tested on the data of the other groups, yielding maximal F 1 scores between 8% and 26%.SignificanceOur results suggest that algorithms based on ECG features alone can provide clinically meaningful performance for automatic detection of all seizure types. Our study also underscores that the circumstances under which such algorithms were developed, and the selection of the training and test data sets need to be considered and limit the application of such systems to unseen patient groups behaving in different conditions.

The potential of closed-loop endovascular neurostimulation as a viable therapeutic approach for drug-resistant epilepsy: A critical review.

Over the last few decades, biomedical implants have successfully delivered therapeutic electrical stimulation to reduce the frequency and severity of seizures in people with drug-resistant epilepsy. However, neurostimulation approaches require invasive surgery to implant stimulating electrodes, and surgical, medical, and hardware complications are not uncommon. An endovascular approach provides a potentially safer and less invasive surgical alternative. This article critically evaluates the feasibility of endovascular closed-loop neuromodulation for the treatment of epilepsy. By reviewing literature that reported the impact of direct electrical stimulation to reduce the frequency of epileptic seizures, we identified clinically validated extracranial, cortical, and deep cortical neural targets. We identified veins in close proximity to these targets and evaluated the potential of delivering an endovascular implant to these veins based on their diameter. We then compared the risks and benefits of existing technology to describe a benchmark of clinical safety and efficacy that would need to be achieved for endovascular neuromodulation to provide therapeutic benefit. For the majority of brain regions that have been clinically demonstrated to reduce seizure occurrence in response to delivered electrical stimulation, vessels of appropriate diameter for delivery of an endovascular electrode to these regions could be achieved. This includes delivery to the vagus nerve via the 13.2±0.9mm diameter internal jugular vein, the motor cortex via the 6.5±1.7mm diameter superior sagittal sinus, and the cerebellum via the 7.7±1.4mm diameter sigmoid sinus or 6.2±1.4mm diameter transverse sinus. Deep cerebral targets can also be accessed with an endovascular approach, with the 1.9±0.5mm diameter internal cerebral vein and 1.2-mm-diameter thalamostriate vein lying in close proximity to the anterior and centromedian nuclei of the thalamus, respectively. This work identified numerous veins that are in close proximity to conventional stimulation targets that are of a diameter large enough for delivery and deployment of an endovascular electrode array, supporting future work to assess clinical efficacy and chronic safety of an endovascular approach to deliver therapeutic neurostimulation.

Predictors of New-Onset Epilepsy in People With Younger-Onset Neurocognitive Disorders.

Objective: People with neurocognitive disorders (NCDs) have an increased risk of epilepsy. However, most studies investigating the risk of seizures in people with NCDs are limited to those with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and vascular dementia (VD), and those who developed dementia after age 65 years. A knowledge gap exists regarding factors associated with development of epilepsy in people with younger-onset NCD, and those with non-AD and non-VD dementia subtypes. In this study, we aimed to identify the factors associated with the development of epilepsy in people with younger-onset NCDs of varied etiologies, the majority of whom had symptom onset prior to age 65 years.Participants and Methods: This was a retrospective study reviewing the medical records of consecutive people admitted with cognitive impairment to a tertiary neuropsychiatry unit between 1 January 2004 and 30 April 2019. People diagnosed with primary NCDs were included in the analysis. The prevalence and characteristics of epilepsy were described. The factors associated with developing epilepsy were identified in a binary logistic regression model.Results: A total of 427 people were included. One hundred fourteen had Alzheimer's disease, 104 frontotemporal dementia, 51 vascular dementia, 69 movement disorder-associated dementia, and 89 unspecified NCD. The median age on admission was 59 years (range 33–86) and 75.2% (n = 321/427) had young-onset NCD with onset before 65 years of age. 40/427 (9.4%) people had epilepsy, and epilepsy onset clustered between 2 years before and 6 years after the onset of cognitive decline in 80% (n = 32/40). The most frequent seizure type was focal to bilateral tonic-clonic seizure (35%, n = 14/40). Most of the people (94.7%, n = 36/38) achieved seizure freedom with one or two antiseizure medications. People with unspecified NCD (compared to frontotemporal dementia and movement disorder-associated dementia, age of onset of NCDs ≤50 years, and current smoking status were independently associated with higher risk of developing epilepsy.Conclusion: Epilepsy is common in people with younger-onset NCDs, and a high index of suspicion is warranted particularly for those with unspecified subtype and smoking status. Smoking reduction or cessation should be further investigated as a potentially modifiable factor for risk reduction.