Initial monotherapy with eslicarbazepine acetate for the management of adult patients with focal epilepsy in clinical practice: a meta-analysis of observational studies

This study was funded by Laboratorios Bial, S.A. (Madrid, Spain).The authors thank Alejandro Pedromingo (Bio-estadistica. com, Madrid, Spain) for the statistical analysis, and Isabel San Andrés (Incimed, Madrid, Spain) for performing the literature search. Their participation has been funded by Laboratorios Bial, S.A. (Madrid, Spain).Aim of the study To assess the effectiveness, overall tolerability of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) as an initial or early monotherapy treatment of adult patients with focal epilepsy under real-world practice conditions. Materials and methods We focused on real-world longitudinal studies that included or separately reported the results of at least one of the efficacy outcomes of interest. A DerSimonian-Laird random effects model was used with the presentation of the 95% confidence intervals of the estimate Results 5 studies met our selection criteria and were included in the quantitative synthesis. All studies were observational and uncontrolled studies, and all but one were retrospective studies. The pooled proportion of patients who were seizure-free for the entire study period was 64.6% (95% CI, 45.7 to 79.8) at month 6 and 56.6% (95% CI, 50.2 to 62.8) at month 12. Pooled retention rates were 95.0% (95% CI, 90.3 to 97.5) at 6 months and 83.6% (95% CI, 73.9 to 90.1) at 12 months. The pooled proportion of patients who reported at least one adverse event was 27.2% (95% CI, 21.7 to 33.6), and the pooled proportion of patients who discontinued ESL due to adverse events was 8.9% (95% CI 6.2 to 12.6). Conclusions Our results suggest that initial or early monotherapy with ESL is effective and well-tolerated for the management of adult patients with focal epilepsy in clinical practice, with results that are at least similar to those reported in the pivotal randomized clinical trial of ESL monotherapy. No new safety signals with ESL have been identified in this systematic review.Bial Grou

Evidence based noninvasive presurgical evaluation for patients with drug resistant epilepsies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To review the current practices and evidence for the diagnostic accuracy and the benefits of presurgical evaluation. RECENT FINDINGS: Preoperative evaluation of patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsies and subsequent epilepsy surgery leads to a significant proportion of seizure-free patients. Even those who are not completely seizure free postoperatively often experience improved quality of life with better social integration. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis on the diagnostic accuracy are available for Video-electroencephalographic (EEG) monitoring, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), electric and magnetic source imaging, and functional MRI for lateralization of language and memory. There are currently no evidence-based international guidelines for presurgical evaluation and epilepsy surgery. SUMMARY: Presurgical evaluation is a complex multidisciplinary and multiprofessional clinical pathway. We rely on limited consensus-based recommendations regarding the required staffing or methodological expertise in epilepsy centers

Acute symptomatic status epilepticus: Splitting or lumping? A proposal of classification based on real-world data

This study aimed to group acute symptomatic etiologies of consecutive episodes of status epilepticus (SE) into different subcategories and explore their associations with clinical outcome. Etiologies were first categorized as “acute,” “remote,” “progressive,” “SE in defined electroclinical syndromes,” and “unknown.” Four subcategories of acute etiologies were then defined: (1) withdrawal, low levels, or inappropriate prescription of antiseizure medications, or sleep deprivation in patients with pre-existing epilepsy; (2) acute insults to central nervous system (CNS; “acute-primary CNS”); (3) CNS pathology secondary to metabolic disturbances, systemic infection, or fever (“acute-secondary CNS”); and (4) drug/alcohol intoxication or withdrawal. Poor outcome at discharge, defined as worsening of clinical conditions (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] at discharge higher than mRS at baseline), was reported in 55.6% of cases. The etiological categories of acute-primary CNS (odds ratio [OR] = 3.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.11–6.18), acute-secondary CNS (OR = 1.80, 95% CI = 1.11–2.91), and progressive SE (OR = 2.65, 95% CI = 1.57–4.47), age (OR = 1.05, 95% CI = 1.04–1.06), nonconvulsive semiology with coma (OR = 3.06, 95% CI = 1.52–6.17), and refractoriness (OR = 4.31, 95% CI = 2.39–7.77) and superrefractoriness to treatment (OR = 8.24, 95% CI = 3.51–19.36) increased the odds of poor outcome. Heterogeneity exists within the spectrum of acute symptomatic causes of SE, and distinct etiological subcategories may inform about the clinical outcome

Efficacy and Safety of Cannabidiol in Epilepsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Approximately one-third of patients with epilepsy presents seizures despite adequate treatment. Hence, there is the need to search for new therapeutic options. Cannabidiol (CBD) is a major chemical component of the resin of Cannabis sativa plant, most commonly known as marijuana. The anti-seizure properties of CBD do not relate to the direct action on cannabinoid receptors, but are mediated by a multitude of mechanisms that include the agonist and antagonist effects on ionic channels, neurotransmitter transporters, and multiple 7-transmembrane receptors. In contrast to tetra-hydrocannabinol, CBD lacks psychoactive properties, does not produce euphoric or intrusive side effects, and is largely devoid of abuse liability. Objective: The aim of the study was to estimate the efficacy and safety of CBD as adjunctive treatment in patients with epilepsy using meta-analytical techniques. Methods: Randomized, placebo-controlled, single- or double-blinded add-on trials of oral CBD in patients with uncontrolled epilepsy were identified. Main outcomes included the percentage change and the proportion of patients with ≥ 50% reduction in monthly seizure frequency during the treatment period and the incidence of treatment withdrawal and adverse events (AEs). Results: Four trials involving 550 patients with Lennox–Gastaut syndrome (LGS) and Dravet syndrome (DS) were included. The pooled average difference in change in seizure frequency during the treatment period resulted 19.5 [95% confidence interval (CI) 8.1–31.0; p = 0.001] percentage points between the CBD 10 mg and placebo groups and 19.9 (95% CI 11.8–28.1; p < 0.001) percentage points between the CBD 20 mg and placebo arms, in favor of CBD. The reduction in all-types seizure frequency by at least 50% occurred in 37.2% of the patients in the CBD 20 mg group and 21.2% of the placebo-treated participants [risk ratio (RR) 1.76, 95% CI 1.07–2.88; p = 0.025]. Across the trials, drug withdrawal for any reason occurred in 11.1% and 2.6% of participants receiving CBD and placebo, respectively (RR 3.54, 95% CI 1.55–8.12; p = 0.003) [Chi squared = 2.53, degrees of freedom (df) = 3, p = 0.506; I2 = 0.0%]. The RRs to discontinue treatment were 1.45 (95% CI 0.28–7.41; p = 0.657) and 4.20 (95% CI 1.82–9.68; p = 0.001) for CBD at the doses of 10 and 20 mg/kg/day, respectively, in comparison to placebo. Treatment was discontinued due to AEs in 8.9% and 1.8% of patients in the active and control arms, respectively (RR 5.59, 95% CI 1.87–16.73; p = 0.002). The corresponding RRs for CBD at the doses of 10 and 20 mg/kg/day were 1.66 (95% CI 0.22–12.86; p = 0.626) and 6.89 (95% CI 2.28–20.80; p = 0.001). AEs occurred in 87.9% and 72.2% of patients treated with CBD and placebo (RR 1.22, 95% CI 1.11–1.33; p < 0.001). AEs significantly associated with CBD were somnolence, decreased appetite, diarrhea, and increased serum aminotransferases. Conclusions: Adjunctive CBD in patients with LGS or DS experiencing seizures uncontrolled by concomitant anti-epileptic treatment regimens is associated with a greater reduction in seizure frequency and a higher rate of AEs than placebo

Adjunctive Cenobamate for Focal-Onset Seizures in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Cenobamate is a novel tetrazole-derived carbamate compound with a dual mechanism of action. This drug can enhance the inactivated state of voltage-gated sodium channels, preferentially inhibiting the persistent component of the sodium channel current, and acts as a positive allosteric modulator of GABAA receptors, binding at a non-benzodiazepine site. Objective: We assessed the efficacy and safety of adjunctive cenobamate for the treatment of focal-onset seizures in adult patients with epilepsy using meta-analytical techniques. Methods: We systematically searched (May, week 4, 2020) MEDLINE (accessed by PubMed), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the US National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Registry (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov). There were no date limitations or language restrictions. Randomized, placebo-controlled, single or double-blinded, add-on trials of cenobamate in adult patients with uncontrolled focal-onset seizures were identified. Main outcomes included the proportion of patients with ≥ 50 and 100% reduction in seizure frequency during the maintenance treatment period compared with baseline and the incidence of treatment withdrawal and adverse events (AEs). Risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was estimated for each outcome. Results: Two trials were included, overall enrolling 659 patients (442 for the add-on cenobamate group and 217 for the add-on placebo group). Seizure frequency reduction by at least 50% occurred during the maintenance phase in 50.1% of the patients randomized to cenobamate and 23.5% of the placebo-treated participants (RR 2.18, 95% CI 1.67–2.85; p < 0.001). The pooled estimated RR to achieve seizure freedom for the cenobamate group in comparison with placebo was 3.71 (95% CI 1.93–7.14; p < 0.001). Withdrawal from randomized treatment occurred in 16.7 and 11.1% of participants receiving cenobamate and placebo, respectively (RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.85–2.09; p = 0.205). Treatment was discontinued due to AEs in 12.2 and 4.1% of the patients in the active and control arms (RR 2.27, 95% CI 1.08–4.79; p = 0.031). AEs were reported in 76.9 and 66.8% of the patients during treatment with cenobamate and placebo (RR 1.14, 95% CI 1.02–1.26; p = 0.021). The cenobamate-associated AEs included somnolence, dizziness, fatigue, balance disorder, and diplopia. Conclusions: Adjunctive cenobamate in adult patients with uncontrolled focal-onset seizures is associated with a greater reduction in seizure frequency and a higher rate of AEs than placebo

Atogepant for the Prevention of Episodic Migraine in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Efficacy and Safety

Introduction: The inhibition of the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway has attracted interest in pharmacological research on migraine. Atogepant is a potent, selective, orally available antagonist of the CGRP receptor approved as a preventive treatment of episodic migraine. This systematic review with meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of atogepant for the prevention of episodic migraine in adult patients. Methods: Randomized, placebo-controlled, single or double-blinded trials were identified through a systematic literature search (December week 4, 2021). Main outcomes included the changes from baseline in monthly migraine days and the incidence of adverse events (AEs) and treatment withdrawal due to AEs. Mean difference (MD) and risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were estimated. Results: Two trials were included, overall enrolling 1550 patients. A total of 408 participants were randomized to placebo, 314 to atogepant 10 mg, 411 to atogepant 30 mg, and 417 to atogepant 60 mg once daily. The mean age of the patients was 41.0 years and 87.7% were women. The reduction in the mean number of migraine days from baseline across the 12-week treatment period was significantly greater among patients treated with atogepant at either the daily dose of 10 mg (MD − 1.16, 95% CI − 1.60 to − 0.73, p < 0.001), 30 mg (MD − 1.15, 95% CI − 1.54 to − 0.76, p < 0.001), or 60 mg (MD − 1.20, 95% CI − 2.18 to − 0.22, p = 0.016) than with placebo. There were no differences in the occurrence of AEs and drug withdrawal due to AEs between atogepant and placebo groups. Constipation was more commonly observed in patients treated with atogepant at 30 mg/day than placebo (RR 5.19, 95% CI 2.00–13.46; p = 0.001). Treatment with atogepant at the daily dose of 60 mg was associated with a higher risk of constipation (RR 4.92, 95% CI 1.89–12.79; p = 0.001) and nausea (RR 2.73, 95% CI 1.47–5.06; p = 0.001) than placebo. Conclusion: Atogepant is an efficacious and overall well-tolerated treatment for the prevention of episodic migraine in adults

Unraveling the enigma of new-onset refractory status epilepticus: a systematic review of aetiologies

Background and purpose: New-onset refractory status epilepticus (NORSE) is a clinical presentation, neither a specific diagnosis nor a clinical entity. It refers to a patient without active epilepsy or other pre-existing relevant neurological disorder, with a NORSE without a clear acute or active structural, toxic or metabolic cause. This study reviews the currently available evidence about the aetiology of patients presenting with NORSE and NORSE-related conditions. Methods: A systematic search was carried out for clinical trials, observational studies, case series and case reports including patients who presented with NORSE, febrile-infection-related epilepsy syndrome or the infantile hemiconvulsion-hemiplegia and epilepsy syndrome. Results: Four hundred and fifty records were initially identified, of which 197 were included in the review. The selected studies were retrospective case–control (n = 11), case series (n = 83) and case reports (n = 103) and overall described 1334 patients both of paediatric and adult age. Aetiology remains unexplained in about half of the cases, representing the so-called ‘cryptogenic NORSE’. Amongst adult patients without cryptogenic NORSE, the most often identified cause is autoimmune encephalitis, either non-paraneoplastic or paraneoplastic. Infections are the prevalent aetiology of paediatric non-cryptogenic NORSE. Genetic and congenital disorders can have a causative role in NORSE, and toxic, vascular and degenerative conditions have also been described. Conclusions: Far from being a unitary condition, NORSE is a heterogeneous and clinically challenging presentation. The development and dissemination of protocols and guidelines to standardize diagnostic work-up and guide therapeutic approaches should be implemented. Global cooperation and multicentre research represent priorities to improve the understanding of NORSE