Management and birth outcomes of pregnant women with Chiari malformations : a 14 years retrospective case series

Objective The management of Chiari malformations in pregnancy is challenging due to the perceived risk of adverse maternal neurological outcomes and raising intracranial pressure during labour. Our aim was to evaluate the management and health outcomes of pregnant women cared for at a regional referral center and highlight elements of best practice. Study Design A retrospective case series of all pregnant women diagnosed with Chiari malformation over fourteen years (January 2004- June 2018) at the Birmingham Women’s Hospital – UK. Results Twenty-one women (23 pregnancies) with Chiari malformation were included, four had syringomyelia (4/21,19%) and six had previously undergone craniovertebral decompression (6/21, 29%). The median age was 34-years (range 20-41), the median gravidity was two (range 1-8), the median parity was one (range 0-6), and the median extent of tonsillar herniation was 11 mm (range 9-18). The majority of women received their preferred mode of delivery (15 normal vaginal deliveries (15/23, 65.2%) and 6 elective Caesarean sections (6/23, 26.1%)) with two pregnancies ending with an emergency caesarean section for obstetric complications (2/23, 8.7%). Five Caesarean section were performed under general anaesthetic, two under spinal (2/23, 8.7%) and one under epidural anaesthesia (1/23, 4.3%) with no neurological sequelae. There were no adverse neurological outcomes at discharge postnatally. Conclusions Offering normal vaginal delivery with effective analgesia, for women with Chiari malformation, appears to be safe. Pregnancy care should be provided by a multi-disciplinary team with experience in managing Chiari malformation

Cognitive impairment in adults with epilepsy: The relationship between subjective and objective assessments of cognition

Aim: This study aimed to assess the relationship between objective measures of cognition and subjective perception of cognitive functioning reported by patients with epilepsy and their caregivers. Methods: One hundred patients with epilepsy attending hospital neurology outpatient clinics and their caregivers were enrolled in this study. The EpiTrack® (version 1) brief cognitive screening tool was used to measure objective impairment, the ABNAS questionnaire (A-B Neuropsychological Assessment Schedule) to assess subjective cognitive performance, and a version of the ABNAS designed to be completed by caregivers (C-ABNAS) to document caregivers' views. Patient anxiety and depression were measured using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and considered as covariates. Patients with an uncertain diagnosis of epilepsy or likely severe comorbid mood or anxiety disorders were excluded. Results: Data from 82 patients were analyzed after exclusion of patients with uncertain diagnoses or likely severe comorbid mood or anxiety disorders. Fifty-nine (72%) had a degree of objective cognitive impairment. Fifty (84.7%) of these 59 patients had 'high' ABNAS scores concordant with the objective assessment, and 43 (72.9%) had high C-ABNAS scores matching the abnormalities detected by objective screening. Of the 23 (28%) patients without objective cognitive impairment, seven (30.4%) had concordantly low ABNAS scores, and 10 (43.4%) had concordantly low C-ABNAS scores. Patient memory impairment was more often reported by patients themselves than by caregivers (p. =. 0.011). Carers were significantly more likely to rate patients as having impaired motor coordination than patients themselves.A small part of the variance of the EpiTrack score was predicted by the C-ABNAS.Objective cognitive performance did not predict ABNAS or C-ABNAS scores. Conclusions: Self-report or caregiver report questionnaires identify patients with epilepsy and objective cognitive impairment more accurately than patients with intact cognition. Those without objective evidence of cognitive impairment may, nevertheless, perceive themselves as having memory dysfunction; it is these patients, therefore, who most require both subjective and objective assessments of cognition, including carers' assessments, in order to establish the nature of their symptoms. None of these assessment measures can be used as a reliable proxy for another, each contributes individually to a comprehensive assessment of cognition, and all must be used in conjunction with measures of mood and anxiety

The SANAD II study of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam, zonisamide, or lamotrigine for newly diagnosed focal epilepsy: an open-label, non-inferiority, multicentre, phase 4, randomised controlled trial

Background: Levetiracetam and zonisamide are licensed as monotherapy for patients with focal epilepsy, but there is uncertainty as to whether they should be recommended as first-line treatments because of insufficient evidence of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. We aimed to assess the long-term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam and zonisamide compared with lamotrigine in people with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy. Methods: This randomised, open-label, controlled trial compared levetiracetam and zonisamide with lamotrigine as first-line treatment for patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy. Adult and paediatric neurology services across the UK recruited participants aged 5 years or older (with no upper age limit) with two or more unprovoked focal seizures. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1:1) using a minimisation programme with a random element utilising factor to receive lamotrigine, levetiracetam, or zonisamide. Participants and investigators were not masked and were aware of treatment allocation. SANAD II was designed to assess non-inferiority of both levetiracetam and zonisamide to lamotrigine for the primary outcome of time to 12-month remission. Anti-seizure medications were taken orally and for participants aged 12 years or older the initial advised maintenance doses were lamotrigine 50 mg (morning) and 100 mg (evening), levetiracetam 500 mg twice per day, and zonisamide 100 mg twice per day. For children aged between 5 and 12 years the initial daily maintenance doses advised were lamotrigine 1·5 mg/kg twice per day, levetiracetam 20 mg/kg twice per day, and zonisamide 2·5 mg/kg twice per day. All participants were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. The per-protocol (PP) analysis excluded participants with major protocol deviations and those who were subsequently diagnosed as not having epilepsy. Safety analysis included all participants who received one dose of any study drug. The non-inferiority limit was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·329, which equates to an absolute difference of 10%. A HR greater than 1 indicated that an event was more likely on lamotrigine. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 30294119 (EudraCt number: 2012-001884-64). Findings: 990 participants were recruited between May 2, 2013, and June 20, 2017, and followed up for a further 2 years. Patients were randomly assigned to receive lamotrigine (n=330), levetiracetam (n=332), or zonisamide (n=328). The ITT analysis included all participants and the PP analysis included 324 participants randomly assigned to lamotrigine, 320 participants randomly assigned to levetiracetam, and 315 participants randomly assigned to zonisamide. Levetiracetam did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the ITT analysis of time to 12-month remission versus lamotrigine (HR 1·18; 97·5% CI 0·95–1·47) but zonisamide did meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the ITT analysis versus lamotrigine (1·03; 0·83–1·28). The PP analysis showed that 12-month remission was superior with lamotrigine than both levetiracetam (HR 1·32 [97·5% CI 1·05 to 1·66]) and zonisamide (HR 1·37 [1·08–1·73]). There were 37 deaths during the trial. Adverse reactions were reported by 108 (33%) participants who started lamotrigine, 144 (44%) participants who started levetiracetam, and 146 (45%) participants who started zonisamide. Lamotrigine was superior in the cost-utility analysis, with a higher net health benefit of 1·403 QALYs (97·5% central range 1·319–1·458) compared with 1·222 (1·110–1·283) for levetiracetam and 1·232 (1·112, 1·307) for zonisamide at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000 per QALY. Cost-effectiveness was based on differences between treatment groups in costs and QALYs. Interpretation: These findings do not support the use of levetiracetam or zonisamide as first-line treatments for patients with focal epilepsy. Lamotrigine should remain a first-line treatment for patients with focal epilepsy and should be the standard treatment in future trials. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme

The SANAD II study of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of valproate versus levetiracetam for newly diagnosed generalised and unclassifiable epilepsy: an open-label, non-inferiority, multicentre, phase 4, randomised controlled trial

Background: Valproate is a first-line treatment for patients with newly diagnosed idiopathic generalised or difficult to classify epilepsy, but not for women of child-bearing potential because of teratogenicity. Levetiracetam is increasingly prescribed for these patient populations despite scarcity of evidence of clinical effectiveness or cost-effectiveness. We aimed to compare the long-term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam compared with valproate in participants with newly diagnosed generalised or unclassifiable epilepsy. Methods: We did an open-label, randomised controlled trial to compare levetiracetam with valproate as first-line treatment for patients with generalised or unclassified epilepsy. Adult and paediatric neurology services (69 centres overall) across the UK recruited participants aged 5 years or older (with no upper age limit) with two or more unprovoked generalised or unclassifiable seizures. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive either levetiracetam or valproate, using a minimisation programme with a random element utilising factors. Participants and investigators were aware of treatment allocation. For participants aged 12 years or older, the initial advised maintenance doses were 500 mg twice per day for levetiracetam and valproate, and for children aged 5–12 years, the initial daily maintenance doses advised were 25 mg/kg for valproate and 40 mg/kg for levetiracetam. All drugs were administered orally. SANAD II was designed to assess the non-inferiority of levetiracetam compared with valproate for the primary outcome time to 12-month remission. The non-inferiority limit was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·314, which equates to an absolute difference of 10%. A HR greater than 1 indicated that an event was more likely on valproate. All participants were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. Per-protocol (PP) analyses excluded participants with major protocol deviations and those who were subsequently diagnosed as not having epilepsy. Safety analyses included all participants who received one dose of any study drug. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 30294119 (EudraCt number: 2012-001884-64). Findings: 520 participants were recruited between April 30, 2013, and Aug 2, 2016, and followed up for a further 2 years. 260 participants were randomly allocated to receive levetiracetam and 260 participants to receive valproate. The ITT analysis included all participants and the PP analysis included 255 participants randomly allocated to valproate and 254 randomly allocated to levetiracetam. Median age of participants was 13·9 years (range 5·0–94·4), 65% were male and 35% were female, 397 participants had generalised epilepsy, and 123 unclassified epilepsy. Levetiracetam did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the ITT analysis of time to 12-month remission (HR 1·19 [95% CI 0·96–1·47]); non-inferiority margin 1·314. The PP analysis showed that the 12-month remission was superior with valproate than with levetiracetam. There were two deaths, one in each group, that were unrelated to trial treatments. Adverse reactions were reported by 96 (37%) participants randomly assigned to valproate and 107 (42%) participants randomly assigned to levetiracetam. Levetiracetam was dominated by valproate in the cost-utility analysis, with a negative incremental net health benefit of −0·040 (95% central range −0·175 to 0·037) and a probability of 0·17 of being cost-effectiveness at a threshold of £20 000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Cost-effectiveness was based on differences between treatment groups in costs and quality-adjusted life-years. Interpretation: Compared with valproate, levetiracetam was found to be neither clinically effective nor cost-effective. For girls and women of child-bearing potential, these results inform discussions about benefit and harm of avoiding valproate. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment Programme

Biallelic variants in ZNF142 lead to a syndromic neurodevelopmental disorder

Biallelic variants of the gene encoding for the zinc‐finger protein 142 (ZNF142) have recently been associated with intellectual disability (ID), speech impairment, seizures, and movement disorders in nine individuals from five families. In this study, we obtained phenotype and genotype information of 26 further individuals from 16 families. Among the 27 different ZNF142 variants identified in the total of 35 individuals only four were missense. Missense variants may give a milder phenotype by changing the local structure of ZF motifs as suggested by protein modeling; but this correlation should be validated in larger cohorts and pathogenicity of the missense variants should be investigated with functional studies. Clinical features of the 35 individuals suggest that biallelic ZNF142 variants lead to a syndromic neurodevelopmental disorder with mild to moderate ID, varying degrees of delay in language and gross motor development, early onset seizures, hypotonia, behavioral features, movement disorders, and facial dysmorphism. The differences in symptom frequencies observed in the unpublished individuals compared to those of published, and recognition of previously underemphasized facial features are likely to be due to the small sizes of the previous cohorts, which underlines the importance of larger cohorts for the phenotype descriptions of rare genetic disorders

Characteristics of 698 patients with dissociative seizures: a UK multicenter study

Objective We aimed to characterize the demographics of adults with dissociative (nonepileptic) seizures, placing emphasis on distribution of age at onset, male:female ratio, levels of deprivation, and dissociative seizure semiology. Methods We collected demographic and clinical data from 698 adults with dissociative seizures recruited to the screening phase of the CODES (Cognitive Behavioural Therapy vs Standardised Medical Care for Adults With Dissociative Non‐Epileptic Seizures) trial from 27 neurology/specialist epilepsy clinics in the UK. We described the cohort in terms of age, age at onset of dissociative seizures, duration of seizure disorder, level of socioeconomic deprivation, and other social and clinical demographic characteristics and their associations. Results In what is, to date, the largest study of adults with dissociative seizures, the overall modal age at dissociative seizure onset was 19 years; median age at onset was 28 years. Although 74% of the sample was female, importantly the male:female ratio varied with age at onset, with 77% of female but only 59% of male participants developing dissociative seizures by the age of 40 years. The frequency of self‐reported previous epilepsy was 27%; nearly half of these epilepsy diagnoses were retrospectively considered erroneous by clinicians. Patients with predominantly hyperkinetic dissociative seizures had a shorter disorder duration prior to diagnosis in this study than patients with hypokinetic seizures (P < .001); dissociative seizure type was not associated with gender. Predominantly hyperkinetic seizures were most commonly seen in patients with symptom onset in their late teens. Thirty percent of the sample reported taking antiepileptic drugs; this was more common in men. More than 50% of the sample lived in areas characterized by the highest levels of deprivation, and more than two‐thirds were unemployed. Significance Females with dissociative seizures were more common at all ages, whereas the proportion of males increased with age at onset. This disorder was associated with socioeconomic deprivation. Those with hypokinetic dissociative seizures may be at risk for delayed diagnosis and treatment