Quantitative Analysis of EEG Signal in Drug-Resistant Juvenile Myoclonic Epilepsy

Juvenile Myoclonic Epilepsy (JME) is a genetic generalised epilepsy syndromes characterized by myoclonic jerks mostly in the morning, tonic-clonic seizures and absence seizures. About 30% of people with JME continue to have seizures despite treatment with antiepileptic drugs. Quantitative EEG (qEEG) is a computer analysis of the electroencephalography. The aim of this study was to compare qualitative vs quantitative EEG, quantitatively analyse background EEG activity in two different physiological states and the correlation with cognitive performances in patients with refractory JME. Inclusion criteria were: drug-resistant JME and aged between 14 and 65 years. The recorded ambulatory EEG data was subjected to visual and quantitative analysis and chosed two samples of 20-60 second duration per patient, morning sample (MS) and evening sample (ES). Our study cohort consisted of 19 patients with refractory JME, 6 females and 13 males, with a mean age of 29.8 years. EEG visual analysis of background activity revealed inter-ictal abnormalities in all patients localized to left frontal region. When we compared dominant rhythm in standard EEG with dominant rhythm in qEEG we have found that is 1.50 is associated with a decrease in cognitive IQ scores

Lamotrigine add-on therapy for drug-resistant generalised tonic-clonic seizures

BACKGROUND: This is an update of the Cochrane Review first published in 2010; it includes one additional study. Primary generalised tonic‐clonic seizures are a type of generalised seizure. Other types of seizures include: absence, myoclonic, and atonic seizures. Effective control of tonic‐clonic seizures reduces the risk of injury and death, and improves quality of life. While most people achieve seizure control with one antiepileptic drug, around 30% do not, and require a combination of antiepileptic drugs. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and tolerability of add‐on lamotrigine for drug‐resistant primary generalised tonic‐clonic seizures. SEARCH METHODS: For the latest update, we searched these databases on 19 March 2019: Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS) Web, MEDLINE Ovid, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). The CRS includes records from the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, Embase, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We imposed no language restrictions. We also contacted GlaxoSmithKline, manufacturers of lamotrigine. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled parallel or cross‐over trials of add‐on lamotrigine for people of any age with drug‐resistant primary generalised tonic‐clonic seizures. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We followed standard Cochrane methodology; two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion, evaluated risk of bias, extracted relevant data, and GRADE‐assessed evidence. We investigated these outcomes: (1) 50% or greater reduction in primary generalised tonic‐clonic seizure frequency; (2) seizure freedom; (3) treatment withdrawal; (4) adverse effects; (5) cognitive effects; and (6) quality of life. We used an intention‐to‐treat (ITT) population for all analyses, and presented results as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs); for adverse effects, we used 99% CIs to compensate for multiple hypothesis testing. MAIN RESULTS: We included three studies (total 300 participants): two parallel‐group studies and one cross‐over study. We assessed varied risks of bias across studies; most limitations arose from the poor reporting of methodological details. We meta‐analysed data extracted from the two parallel‐group studies, and conducted a narrative synthesis for data from the cross‐over study. Both parallel‐group studies (270 participants) reported all dichotomous outcomes. Participants taking lamotrigine were almost twice as likely to attain a 50% or greater reduction in primary generalised tonic‐clonic seizure frequency than those taking a placebo (RR 1.88, 95% CI 1.43 to 2.45; low‐certainty evidence). The results between groups were inconclusive for the likelihood of seizure freedom (RR 1.55, 95% CI 0.89 to 2.72; very low‐certainty evidence); treatment withdrawal (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.99; very low‐certainty evidence); and individual adverse effects: ataxia (RR 3.05, 99% CI 0.05 to 199.36); dizziness (RR 0.91, 99% CI 0.29 to 2.86; very low‐certainty evidence); fatigue (RR 1.02, 99% CI 0.13 to 8.14; very low‐certainty evidence); nausea (RR 1.60, 99% CI 0.48 to 5.32; very low‐certainty evidence); and somnolence (RR 3.73, 99% CI 0.36 to 38.90; low‐certainty evidence). The cross‐over trial (26 participants) reported that 7/14 participants with generalised tonic‐clonic seizures experienced a 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency with add‐on lamotrigine compared to placebo. The authors reported four treatment withdrawals, but did not specify during which treatment allocation they occurred. Rash (seven lamotrigine participants; zero placebo participants) and fatigue (five lamotrigine participants; zero placebo participants) were the most frequently reported adverse effects. None of the included studies measured cognition. One parallel‐group study (N = 153) evaluated quality of life. They reported inconclusive results for the overall quality of life score between groups (P = 0.74). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review provides insufficient information to inform clinical practice. Low‐certainty evidence suggests that lamotrigine reduces the rate of generalised tonic‐clonic seizures by 50% or more. Very low‐certainty evidence found inconclusive results between groups for all other outcomes. Therefore, we are uncertain to very uncertain that the results reported are accurate, and suggest that the true effect could be grossly different. More trials, recruiting larger populations, over longer periods, are necessary to determine lamotrigine's clinical use

Lamotrigine add-on therapy for drug-resistant focal epilepsy.

BACKGROUND:This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review previously published in 2016. Epilepsy is a common neurological disorder, affecting 0.5% to 1% of the population. For nearly 30% of these people, their epilepsy is resistant to currently available drugs. Pharmacological treatment remains the first choice to control epilepsy. Lamotrigine is one of the newer antiepileptic drugs. Lamotrigine, in combination with other antiepileptic drugs (add-on), can reduce seizures, but with some adverse effects. OBJECTIVES:To determine the effects of lamotrigine on (1) seizures, (2) adverse-effect profile, and (3) cognition and quality of life, compared to placebo, when used as an add-on treatment for people with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. SEARCH METHODS:For the latest update of the review, we searched the following databases on 9 March 2020: Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to March 06, 2020). CRS Web includes randomized or quasi-randomized, controlled trials from PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialized Registers of Cochrane Review Groups including Epilepsy. No language restrictions were imposed. SELECTION CRITERIA:Randomised placebo-controlled trials of people with drug-resistant focal epilepsy of any age, in which an adequate method of concealment of randomisation was used. The studies were double-, single- or unblinded, placebo-controlled. For cross-over studies, the first treatment period was treated as a parallel trial. Eligible participants were adults or children with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:For this update, two review authors independently assessed the trials for inclusion, and extracted data. Outcomes included 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency, treatment withdrawal (any reason), adverse effects, effects on cognition and quality of life. Primary analyses were by intention-to-treat. Sensitivity best- and worse-case analyses were undertaken to account for missing outcome data. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% Cls) were estimated for the primary outcomes of seizure frequency and treatment withdrawal. For adverse effects, we calculated pooled RRs and 99% Cls. MAIN RESULTS:We did not identify any new studies for this update, therefore, the results and conclusions are unchanged. In previous updates of this review, the authors found five parallel add-on studies, eight cross-over studies in adults or children with drug-resistant focal epilepsy, and one parallel add-on study with a responder-enriched design in infants. In total, these 14 studies included 1806 eligible participants (38 infants, 199 children, 1569 adults). Baseline phases ranged from four to 12 weeks; treatment phases from eight to 36 weeks. Overall, 11 studies (1243 participants) were rated as having low risk of bias, and three (697 participants) had unclear risk of bias due to lack of reported information around study design. Effective blinding of studies was reported in four studies (563 participants). The overall risk ratio (RR) for 50% or greater reduction in seizure frequency was 1.80 (95% CI 1.45 to 2.23; 12 trials, 1322 participants (adults and children); moderate-certainty evidence) indicating that lamotrigine was significantly more effective than placebo in reducing seizure frequency. The overall RR for treatment withdrawal (for any reason) was 1.11 (95% CI 0.91 to 1.37; 14 trials; 1806 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The adverse events significantly associated with lamotrigine were: ataxia, dizziness, diplopia (double vision), and nausea. The RR of these adverse effects were as follows: ataxia 3.34 (99% Cl 2.01 to 5.55; 12 trials; 1525 participants; high-certainty evidence); dizziness 2.00 (99% Cl 1.52 to 2.64;13 trials; 1768 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); diplopia 3.79 (99% Cl 2.15 to 6.68; 3 trials, 944 participants; high-certainty evidence); nausea 1.81 (99% Cl 1.22 to 2.68; 12 studies,1486 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The limited data available precluded any conclusions about effects on cognition and quality of life. No important heterogeneity between studies was found for any of the outcomes. Overall, we assessed the evidence as high to moderate certainty, due to incomplete data for some outcomes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:Lamotrigine as an add-on treatment for drug-resistant focal seizures appears to be effective in reducing seizure frequency, and seems to be fairly well-tolerated. However, the trials were of relatively short duration and provided no evidence for the long term. Further trials are needed to assess the long-term effects of lamotrigine, and to compare lamotrigine with other add-on drugs

Gabapentin add-on treatment for drug-resistant focal epilepsy

BackgroundThis is an updated version of the Cochrane Review previously published in 2018. Epilepsy is a common neurological disorder characterised by recurrent seizures. Most people with epilepsy have a good prognosis and their seizures are well controlled by a single antiepileptic drug, but up to 30% develop drug-resistant epilepsy, especially people with focal seizures. In this review, we summarised the evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of gabapentin, when used as an add-on treatment for drug-resistant focal epilepsy.ObjectivesTo evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of gabapentin when used as an add-on treatment for people with drug-resistant focal epilepsy.Search methodsFor the latest update, we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE (Ovid) on 11 August 2020. CRS Web includes randomised or quasi-randomised, controlled trials from PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialised Registers of Cochrane Review Groups including Epilepsy. We imposed no language restrictions.Selection criteriaRandomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, add-on trials of gabapentin in people with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. We also included trials using an active drug control group or comparing different doses of gabapentin.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently selected trials for inclusion and extracted the relevant data. We assessed the following outcomes: seizure frequency, seizure freedom, treatment withdrawal (any reason) and adverse effects. Primary analyses were intention-to-treat. We also undertook sensitivity best-case and worst-case analyses. We estimated summary risk ratios (RR) for each outcome and evaluated dose-response in regression models.Main resultsWe identified no new studies for this update, therefore, the results and conclusions are unchanged. In the previous update of this review, we combined data from six trials in meta-analyses of 1206 randomised participants. The overall risk ratio (RR) for reduction in seizure frequency of 50% or more compared to placebo was 1.89 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.40 to 2.55; 6 studies, 1206 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Dose regression analysis (for trials in adults) showed increasing efficacy with increasing dose, with 25.3% (95% CI 19.3 to 32.3) of people responding to gabapentin 1800 mg compared to 9.7% on placebo, a 15.5% increase in response rate (95% CI 8.5 to 22.5). The RR for treatment withdrawal compared to placebo was 1.05 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.49; 6 trials, 1206 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse effects were significantly associated with gabapentin compared to placebo. RRs were as follows: ataxia 2.01 (99% CI 0.98 to 4.11; 3 studies, 787 participants; low-certainty evidence), dizziness 2.43 (99% CI 1.44 to 4.12; 6 studies, 1206 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), fatigue 1.95 (99% CI 0.99 to 3.82; 5 studies, 1161 participants; low-certainty evidence) and somnolence 1.93 (99% CI 1.22 to 3.06; 6 studies, 1206 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a difference for the adverse effects of headache (RR 0.79, 99% CI 0.46 to 1.35; 6 studies, 1206 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) or nausea (RR 0.95, 99% CI 0.52 to 1.73; 4 trials, 1034 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Overall, the studies were at low to unclear risk of bias due to information on each risk of bias domain not being available. We judged the overall certainty of the evidence (using the GRADE approach) as low to moderate due to potential attrition bias resulting from missing outcome data and imprecise results with wide CIs.Authors' conclusionsGabapentin has efficacy as an add-on treatment in people with drug-resistant focal epilepsy, and seems to be fairly well-tolerated. However, the trials reviewed were of relatively short duration and provide no evidence for the long-term efficacy of gabapentin beyond a three-month period. The results cannot be extrapolated to monotherapy or to people with other epilepsy types. Further trials are needed to assess the long-term effects of gabapentin, and to compare gabapentin with other add-on drugs