Antiepileptic drug treatment of generalized tonic-clonic seizures: An evaluation of regulatory data and five criteria for drug selection

BACKGROUND: A generalized tonic–clonic seizure (GTCS) is the most severe form of common epileptic seizure and carries the greatest risk of harm. The aim of this review is to provide an evidence-based guide for the selection of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) for patients with GTCSs. Eight AEDs are approved in Europe and the USA for the treatment of both primarily GTCSs (PGTCSs) and secondarily GTCSs (SGTCSs) and are considered in this paper. METHODS: Each AED is evaluated using five criteria: (1) efficacy, by seizure type (a: PGTCSs and b: SGTCSs); (2) adverse effects; (3) interactions; (4) adherence and dosing; and (5) mechanism of action (MOA). To ensure the inclusions of robust data, only efficacy data accepted by regulatory authorities were considered, and data related to adverse effects, interactions, adherence, and MOA were all extracted from UK Summaries of Product Characteristics (SPCs). RESULTS: (1a) There is class 1 evidence of the efficacy of only four AEDs in controlling PGTCSs (lamotrigine, levetiracetam, perampanel, and topiramate). (1b) There is no class 1 evidence of the efficacy of any AED in SGTCSs although some evidence from pooled/subgroup analyses or meta-analyses supports the use of the four AEDs (levetiracetam, perampanel, topiramate, and with less robust data for lamotrigine). (2) AEDs are associated with different, but to some extent overlapping, common adverse effect profiles but have differing idiosyncratic adverse effects. (3) Pharmacokinetic interactions are seen with most, but not all, AEDs and are most common with carbamazepine and phenytoin. (4) Good adherence is important for seizure control and is influenced by frequency of dosing, among other factors. (5) Mechanism of action is also a consideration in rationalising AED selection when switching or combining AEDs. CONCLUSION: Ultimately, the choice of AED depends on all these factors but particularly on efficacy and adverse effects. Different patients will weigh the various factors differently, and the role of the treating physician is to provide accurate information to allow patients to make informed choices

Eslicarbazepine acetate : its effectiveness as adjunctive therapy in clinical trials and open studies

Eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) is a once-daily antiepileptic drug that is approved as adjunctive therapy in adults with focal-onset seizures. Following oral administration, ESL is rapidly metabolized to its active metabolite, eslicarbazepine, which acts primarily by enhancing slow inactivation of voltage-gated sodium channels. The efficacy and safety/tolerability of ESL in the adjunctive setting were established in a comprehensive Phase III program (n = 1702 randomized patients) and this evidence has been supported by several open studies (n = 864). ESL treatment has demonstrated improvements in health-related quality of life, in both randomized clinical trials and open studies. ESL has also been shown to be usually well tolerated and efficacious when used in the adjunctive setting in elderly patients. The effectiveness of ESL as the only add-on to antiepileptic drug monotherapy has been demonstrated in a multinational study (n = 219), subgroup analyses of which have also shown it to be efficacious and generally well tolerated in patients who had previously not responded to carbamazepine therapy. Open studies have also demonstrated improvements in tolerability in patients switched overnight from oxcarbazepine to ESL. Due to differences in pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and metabolism, there may be clinical situations in which it is appropriate to consider switching patients from oxcarbazepine or carbamazepine to ESL

International Veterinary Epilepsy Task Force consensus report on epilepsy definition, classification and terminology in companion animals

Dogs with epilepsy are among the commonest neurological patients in veterinary practice and therefore have historically attracted much attention with regard to definitions, clinical approach and management. A number of classification proposals for canine epilepsy have been published during the years reflecting always in parts the current proposals coming from the human epilepsy organisation the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE). It has however not been possible to gain agreed consensus, “a common language”, for the classification and terminology used between veterinary and human neurologists and neuroscientists, practitioners, neuropharmacologists and neuropathologists. This has led to an unfortunate situation where different veterinary publications and textbook chapters on epilepsy merely reflect individual author preferences with respect to terminology, which can be confusing to the readers and influence the definition and diagnosis of epilepsy in first line practice and research studies. In this document the International Veterinary Epilepsy Task Force (IVETF) discusses current understanding of canine epilepsy and presents our 2015 proposal for terminology and classification of epilepsy and epileptic seizures. We propose a classification system which reflects new thoughts from the human ILAE but also roots in former well accepted terminology. We think that this classification system can be used by all stakeholders

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

International Veterinary Epilepsy Task Force recommendations for a veterinary epilepsy-specific MRI protocol

Epilepsy is one of the most common chronic neurological diseases in veterinary practice. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is regarded as an important diagnostic test to reach the diagnosis of idiopathic epilepsy. However, given that the diagnosis requires the exclusion of other differentials for seizures, the parameters for MRI examination should allow the detection of subtle lesions which may not be obvious with existing techniques. In addition, there are several differentials for idiopathic epilepsy in humans, for example some focal cortical dysplasias, which may only apparent with special sequences, imaging planes and/or particular techniques used in performing the MRI scan. As a result, there is a need to standardize MRI examination in veterinary patients with techniques that reliably diagnose subtle lesions, identify post-seizure changes, and which will allow for future identification of underlying causes of seizures not yet apparent in the veterinary literature. There is a need for a standardized veterinary epilepsy-specific MRI protocol which will facilitate more detailed examination of areas susceptible to generating and perpetuating seizures, is cost efficient, simple to perform and can be adapted for both low and high field scanners. Standardisation of imaging will improve clinical communication and uniformity of case definition between research studies. A 6–7 sequence epilepsy-specific MRI protocol for veterinary patients is proposed and further advanced MR and functional imaging is reviewed

Uneven focal shoe deterioration in Tourette syndrome.

A 31-year-old single man (AB) sought neuropsychiatric consultation for treatment-resistant motor and vocal tics. He described himself expressing a total of 24 different tics, mainly facial twitches (eye blinking, raising eyebrows, mouth opening, lips licking, stereotyped grimacing) and inappropriate utterances (grunting, throat clearing, sniffing), since the age of 7. There appeared to be no family history of tic disorder. He reported occasional utterance of swear words in contextually inappropriate situations (coprolalia), and the urge to copy other people’s movements (echopraxia). Other tic-associated symptoms included self-injurious behaviours and forced touching of objects. A.B. met both DSM-IV-tr and ICD-10 criteria for Tourette syndrome, and also DSM-IV-tr criteria for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (combined type) in childhood

Valproic acid and fatalities in children: a review of individual case safety reports in VigiBase

Introduction Valproic acid is an effective first line drug for the treatment of epilepsy. Hepatotoxicity is a rare and potentially fatal adverse reaction for this medicine. Objective Firstly to characterise valproic acid reports on children with fatal outcome and secondly to determine reporting over time of hepatotoxicity with fatal outcome. Methods Individual case safety reports (ICSRs) for children ≤17 years with valproic acid and fatal outcome were retrieved from the WHO Global ICSR database, VigiBase, in June 2013. Reports were classified into hepatotoxic reactions or other reactions. Shrinkage observed-to-expected ratios were used to explore the relative reporting trend over time and for patient age. The frequency of polytherapy, i.e. reports with more than one antiepileptic medicine, was investigated. Results There have been 268 ICSRs with valproic acid and fatal outcome in children, reported from 25 countries since 1977. A total of 156 fatalities were reported with hepatotoxicity, which has been continuously and disproportionally reported over time. There were 31 fatalities with pancreatitis. Other frequently reported events were coma/encephalopathy, seizures, respiratory disorders and coagulopathy. Hepatotoxicity was disproportionally and most commonly reported in children aged 6 years and under (104/156 reports) but affected children of all ages. Polytherapy was significantly more frequently reported for valproic acid with fatal outcome (58%) compared with non-fatal outcome (34%). Conclusion Hepatotoxicity remains a considerable problem. The risk appears to be greatest in young children (6 years and below) but can occur at any age. Polytherapy is commonly reported and seems to be a risk factor for hepatotoxicity, pancreatitis and other serious adverse drug reactions with valproic acid