Lacosamide as add-on in brain tumor-related epilepsy: preliminary report on efficacy and tolerability

Lacosamide (LCM) is an antiepileptic drug (AED) that has demonstrated a good efficacy in controlling seizures as an add-on in adult epilepsy. To date, there have been no studies on LCM in patients with brain tumor-related epilepsy (BTRE). To evaluate efficacy and tolerability of LCM as an add-on in BTRE, we followed 14 patients suffering from BTRE who had already been treated with other AEDs and who had not experienced adequate seizure control. Eleven patients underwent chemotherapy while being treated with LCM. Mean duration of follow up was 5.4 months (min < 1 max 10 months). Mean seizure number in the last month prior to the introduction of LCM had been 15.4. At last follow-up, the mean seizure number was reduced to 1.9/month. Lacosamide mean dosage was of 332.1 mg/day (min 100 max 400 mg/day). Responder rate was 78.6%. One patient discontinued LCM because of side-effects. There were no other reported side-effects. Preliminary data on the use of LCM in add-on in patients with BTRE indicate that this drug may represent a valid alternative as an add-on in this particular patient population. However, larger samples are necessary in order to draw definitive conclusions.     

Antiepileptic monotherapy in newly diagnosed focal epilepsy. A network meta‐analysis

Second and third generation AEDs have been directly compared to controlled‐release carbamazepine (CBZ‐CR) as initial monotherapy for new‐onset focal epilepsy. Conversely, no head‐to‐head trials have been performed. The aim of this study was to estimate the comparative efficacy and tolerability of the antiepileptic monotherapies in adults with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy through a network meta‐analysis (NMA). Randomized, double‐blinded, parallel group, monotherapy studies comparing any AED to CBZ‐CR in adults with newly diagnosed untreated epilepsy with focal‐onset seizures was identified. The outcome measures were the seizure freedom for 6 and 12 months, the occurrence of treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and the treatment withdrawal due to TEAEs. Mixed treatment comparisons were conducted by a Bayesian NMA using the Markov chain Monte Carlo methods. Effect sizes were calculated as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs). Four trials were included involving 2856 participants, 1445 for CBZ‐CR and 1411 for the comparative AEDs. Monotherapy AEDs compared to CBR‐CR were levetiracetam (LEV), zonisamide (ZNS), lacosamide (LCM), and eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL). There were no statistical differences in the 6‐ and 12‐month seizure freedom and TEAEs occurrence between LEV, ZNS, LCM, ESL, and CBZ‐CR In the analysis of drug withdrawal due to TEAEs, LCM treatment was associated with a significantly lower discontinuation rate than CBZ‐CR (OR 0.659, 95% CrI 0.428‐0.950). LEV, ZNS, LCM, and ESL are effective initial monotherapy treatments in adult patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy and represent suitable alternatives to CBZ‐CR     

Long‐term add‐on pregabalin treatment in patients with partial‐onset epilepsy: Pooled analysis of open‐label clinical trials

Purpose: To evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of long‐term pregabalin as add‐on therapy for patients with poorly controlled partial seizures. Methods: Analysis of data from six long‐term clinical trials involving 2,061 patients receiving open‐label pregabalin 75–600 mg/day adjunctive therapy for partial onset epilepsy refractory to multiple antiepileptic drugs. Results: Total pregabalin exposure was 3,877 person‐years. The mean duration of pregabalin treatment was 534 days (range 0.3–8 years) and 59% completed 1 year. One‐third of patients discontinued for lack of efficacy. The most common dose was ≥300 mg/day; over half took ≥450 mg/day. There was a mean reduction in the 28‐day seizure rate of 25–40%, and more than 40% of all patients had a ≥50% reduction in seizures from baseline during the last 3 months of treatment. Twelve percent of all patients had a 6‐month period continuously free of seizures. In the last year, 6% were seizure‐free for the entire year. Pregabalin was generally well‐tolerated and the safety profile favorable in patients treated for up to several years, with an adverse event (AE) profile similar to short‐term placebo‐controlled trials. Common AEs included CNS symptoms (dizziness, somnolence, headache, and asthenia), accidental injury, and weight gain. CNS AEs tended to be mild and transient. Rates of sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP), mortality, cancer, and status epilepticus were within the expected range for this population. Conclusions: Adjunctive pregabalin was effective, generally well tolerated, and safe in the long‐term treatment of partial seizures, and provided clinically meaningful seizure reduction and freedom without evidence of tolerance over 2 years of follow‐up.     

Course and outcome of childhood epilepsy: A 15‐year follow‐up of the Dutch Study of Epilepsy in Childhood

Purpose: To study the course and outcome of childhood‐onset epilepsy during 15‐year follow‐up (FU). Methods: We extended FU in 413 of 494 children with new‐onset epilepsy recruited in a previously described prospective hospital‐based study by questionnaire. Results: Mean FU was 14.8 years (range 11.6–17.5 years). Five‐year terminal remission (TR) was reached by 71% of the cohort. Course during FU was favorable in 50%, improving in 29%, and poor or deteriorating in 16%. Mean duration of seizure activity was 6.0 years (range 0–21.5 years), strongly depending on etiology and epilepsy type. Duration was <1 year in 25% of the cohort and exceeded 12 years in another 25%. Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) were used by 86% during a mean of 7.4 years: one‐third had their last seizure within 1 year of treatment, and one‐third continued treatment at the end, although some had a 5‐year TR. At last contact, 9% of the cohort was intractable. In multivariate analysis, predictors were nonidiopathic etiology, febrile seizures, no 3‐month remission, and early intractability. Eighteen patients died; 17 had remote symptomatic etiology. Standardized mortality ratio for remote symptomatic etiology was 31.6 [95% confidence interval (CI) 18.4–50.6], versus 0.8 [95% CI 0.02–4.2] for idiopathic/cryptogenic etiology. Discussion: In most children with newly diagnosed epilepsy, the long‐term prognosis of epilepsy is favorable, and in particular, patients with idiopathic etiology will eventually reach remission. In contrast, epilepsy remains active in ～30% and becomes intractable in ～10%. AEDs probably do not influence epilepsy course; they merely suppress seizures. Mortality is significantly higher only in those with remote symptomatic etiology.     

Side‐to‐side axial movements

Aim. To study new semiological signs which help distinguish between primary and secondarily generalised tonic‐clonic seizures (GTCS). Methods. We retrospectively studied 86 GTCS, 13 primary and 73 secondary, in 58 patients who underwent video‐EEG (vEEG) evaluation in our epilepsy monitoring unit. Eleven patients had generalised epilepsy and 47 focal epilepsy. Two expert epileptologists, blinded to diagnosis, examined the vEEGs independently for the presence of five semiological signs. Results. Asymmetry of limb movements in clonic phase, side‐to‐side axial movements, and asymmetric seizure termination occurred more frequently (p<0.05) in secondary GTCS compared to primary GTCS. Combining asymmetry of limb movements in clonic phase and side‐to‐side axial movements provided the greatest value in differentiating secondary GTCS from primary GTCS. Conclusion. Careful examination of GTCS seizure semiology can help differentiate primary from secondary GTCS. The semiological sign of side‐to‐side axial movements, which has not previously been studied in this context, may add to existing literature of semiological signs and be of value for the evaluation of surgical patients in the epilepsy monitoring unit. In the out‐patient setting, a clear history of these signs may help guide drug treatment choices. [Published with video sequences].     

Efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive therapy with zonisamide in childhood intractable epilepsy

Purpose: This study investigated the efficacy and safety of zonisamide (ZNS) adjunctive therapy in children with intractable epilepsy to existing antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Methods: A clinical retrospective study was performed from 2003 to 2005 at two tertiary epilepsy centers. We reviewed the data from 163 children (107 boys and 56 girls) who experienced more than four seizures per month, whose seizures were intractable to an initial 2 or more AEDs, and could be followed up for at least 6 months after ZNS adjunctive therapy initiation. Efficacy was estimated by seizure reduction rate according to seizure types including infantile spasms, and adverse events were also measured. Results: Seventy-nine patients (48.5%) out of 163 patients experienced a reduction in seizure frequency of more than 50%, and 25 patients (15.3%) became seizure-free. The rate of seizure reduction greater than 50% in children with partial seizures was 40.5% (17/42) and in children with generalized seizures was 51.2% (62/121). Of 36 patients who manifested mainly myoclonic seizures, 20 patients (55.6%) showed a seizure reduction of more than 50% and 9 patients (25.0%) were seizure-free. Mean maintenance dosage of drug was 8.2 mg/kg/day (range 5.0-16.0 mg/kg/day). Adverse events were documented in 15 children (9.2%), including somnolence (8 patients), fatigue, and anorexia, but all were transient and successfully managed. One patient discontinued ZNS therapy due to acute pancreatitis. Conclusion: ZNS adjunctive therapy is an effective and safe treatment in various childhood intractable epilepsy.     

Brivaracetam as add‐on treatment in focal epilepsy: A real‐world time‐based analysis

The study assessed the clinical response to add‐on brivaracetam (BRV) in real‐world practice by means of time‐to‐baseline seizure count methodology. Patients with focal epilepsy who were prescribed add‐on BRV were identified. Primary endpoint was the time‐to‐baseline seizure count defined as the number of days until each patient experienced the number of focal seizures that occurred in the 90 days before BRV initiation. Subgroup analysis was performed according to levetiracetam (LEV) status (naive vs prior use). Three‐hundred eighty‐seven patients were included. The overall median time‐to‐baseline seizure count was 150 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 130‐175) days. The median time‐to‐baseline seizure count was 198 (lower limit of 95% CI = 168) days for LEV‐naive patients, 126 (95% CI = 105‐150) days for patients with prior LEV use and withdrawal due to insufficient efficacy, and 170 (95% CI = 128‐291) days for patients who discontinued LEV due to adverse events (P = .002). The number of prior antiseizure medications (adjusted hazard ratio [_adjHR] = 1.07, 95% CI = 1.02‐1.13, P = .009) and baseline monthly seizure frequency (_adjHR = 1.004, 95% CI = 1.001‐1.008, P = .028) were independently associated with the primary endpoint. Add‐on BRV improved seizure control in LEV‐naive and LEV‐prior patients. The time‐to‐baseline seizure count represents an informative endpoint alongside traditional study outcomes and designs.     

Efficacy,tolerability, and retention rates of zonisamide in older adult patients with focal-onset epilepsy: Experiences from two tertiary epilepsy centers

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and retention rates for zonisamide (ZNS) in older adult patients with focal-onset epilepsy.Patients and methodsChart reviews of patients aged 60 years and older with focal-onset epilepsy treated with ZNS in two tertiary epilepsy centers were analyzed retrospectively.ResultsEighty-five patients (41 males, 44 females) aged over 60 years (range: 60–81) with focal-onset epilepsy treated with ZNS were identified; 55.3% of the patients (n = 47) were on monotherapy. The median and average doses of ZNS doses were 200 mg/day (range: 100–400) and 212.9 ± 84.2 mg/day, respectively. With ZNS treatment, 67.1% of the patients (n = 57) were seizure-free for a median of 28 months (range: 10–56) whereas 20% (n = 17) of the patients had seizures that were unresponsive to ZNS treatment. Best seizure control was achieved in patients with poststroke epilepsy; seizure freedom was 80% in this subgroup.Overall retention rate was found to be 83.5%. There was no significant relation between receiving poly- or monotherapy and discontinuation of ZNS (p = 0.18).Thirty-two of the patients (37.6%) lost weight. Median weight loss was 8 kg (range: 2–16). There was no significant correlation between weight loss and the administered doses of ZNS (r = 0.34; p = 0.12).ConclusionDespite limitations due to the retrospective design of the study, the results show that ZNS is a well-retained drug with high efficacy in older adult patients with epilepsy.     

A pilot open‐label trial of zonisamide in Unverricht‐Lundborg disease

Action myoclonus frequently remains the primary cause of disability in Unverricht‐Lundborg disease (EPM1) patients. Pharmacological treatment of myoclonus in these patients continues to be challenging; indeed conventional AEDs may be poorly effective in monotherapy or even in combination. We carried out a pilot, open‐label trial of add‐on zonisamide (ZNS) in patients with EPM1. Twelve EPM1 patients with epilepsy and action myoclonus were included in the study. Oral ZNS was gradually titrated until the target dose of 6 mg/Kg/day. Unified Myoclonus Rating Scale was obtained in each subject before and after ZNS add‐on. A significant reduction of myoclonus severity was reached after ZNS introduction. ZNS was generally well tolerated and only two patients withdrew due to mild adverse effects. Our trial suggests that ZNS may be a valuable therapeutic option in EPM1 patients. © 2010 Movement Disorder Society     

Seizure control in Unverricht‐Lundborg disease: a single‐centre study

New antiepileptic drug (AED) options for generalised seizure types have been adopted for use as treatment for Unverricht‐Lundborg disease. Whether this has led to improved seizure control or functional outcome in ULD patients remains obscure. We retrospectively identified all patients seen at Helsinki University Hospital due to Unverricht‐Lundborg disease during 2003–2008 in order to determine which AED treatments had been retained for long‐term use. The majority of the patients had severe functional disabilities. In the year preceding the last hospital visit, all patients (n=20) were receiving polytherapy and 14 patients had been free of tonic‐clonic seizures. During follow‐up, improvement in myoclonia had been recorded for the majority of patients with either add‐on piracetam, topiramate, or levetiracetam, but valproate was still in use by all patients. Treatment with lamotrigine had been started and retained less often relative to other AEDs. Add‐on AED treatment was often associated with significant adverse effects. Unverricht‐Lundborg disease patients may benefit from add‐on treatment with levetiracetam or topiramate for seizure control. Treatment of eventual comorbidities with other than AEDs is also discussed.     

Rapid loading of intravenous lacosamide: Efficacy and practicability during presurgical video‐EEG monitoring

Purpose: This study investigates immediate efficacy and safety of intravenous application of de novo lacosamide (LCM) as add‐on therapy in patients with pharmacoresistant focal epilepsy. Methods: During presurgical video–electroencephalography (EEG) monitoring, 17 adult inpatients received LCM infusion (200 mg every 12 h for 2–3 days) followed by oral formulation with the same regimen. Before and after intravenous application of LCM, seizures and interictal epileptiform discharges (IEDs) recorded with continuous video‐EEG monitoring were analyzed, and an assessment of adverse events (AEs) was performed daily. To evaluate the midterm tolerability and efficacy, follow‐up visits were conducted 1 and 3 months after discharge from hospital. Key Findings: In the acute phase, intravenous initiation of LCM was well tolerated with few mild or moderate AEs (3 of 17, 17.6%). A significant reduction of seizure frequency in the treatment phase as compared to mean seizure frequency in the 2‐day baseline phase was achieved (p < 0.05 for the first treatment day, and p < 0.005 for the second treatment day). On the first treatment day, 61.5% of the patients were seizure free, and 84.6% on the second treatment day. IED reduction after intravenous application of LCM was not significant. After 1 month, the 50% responder rate was 46.6% and after the 3‐month period, 42.8%. Significance: Our data suggest that rapid intravenous initiation of de novo LCM is safe and may protect against seizures in a rapid and midterm time window.     

Long‐term health‐related quality of life in drug‐resistant temporal lobe epilepsy after anterior temporal lobectomy

Epilepsy surgery is beneficial to patients suffering from drug‐resistant temporal lobe epilepsy in the short term, but fewer reports of long‐term outcomes have been published. To clarify the long‐term outcomes of seizure control and health‐related quality of life after epilepsy surgery, we enrolled 48 patients suffering from drug‐resistant temporal lobe epilepsy. All of the patients received comprehensive presurgical evaluations, including the Quality of Life in Epilepsy Inventory‐89 (QOLIE‐89) questionnaire to measure their health‐related quality of life. Among the patients, 28 patients received surgery (surgical group) and 20 patients remained under medication (medical group). Eight years later, the seizure frequency and QOLIE‐89 were evaluated. The seizure‐free rate was much higher in the surgical group (53.6%) than in the medical group (5%), eight years after the initial evaluation. The follow‐up QOLIE‐89 score was significantly higher in the surgical group than in the medical group. Moreover, the seizure frequency inversely correlated to the QOLIE‐89 score, regardless of the treatment group. Our results provide evidence that epilepsy surgery confers benefits with respect to seizure control and health‐related quality of life for drug‐resistant temporal lobe epilepsy patients based on long‐term follow‐up.     

Outcome of vagus nerve stimulation for drug‐resistant epilepsy: the first three years of a prospective Japanese registry

Aims. Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is an established option of adjunctive treatment for patients with drug‐resistant epilepsy, however, evidence for long‐term efficacy is still limited. Studies on clinical outcomes of VNS in Asia are also limited. We report the overall outcome of a national, prospective registry that included all patients implanted in Japan. Methods. The registry included patients of all ages with all seizure types who underwent VNS implantation for drug‐resistant epilepsy in the first three years after approval of VNS in 2010. The registry excluded patients who were expected to benefit from resective surgery. Efficacy analysis was assessed based on the change in frequency of all seizure types and the rate of responders. Changes in cognitive, behavioural and social status, quality of life (QOL), antiepileptic drug (AED) use, and overall AED burden were analysed as other efficacy indices. Results. A total of 385 patients were initially registered. Efficacy analyses included data from 362 patients. Age range at the time of VNS implantation was 12 months to 72 years; 21.5% of patients were under 12 years of age and 49.7% had prior epilepsy surgery. Follow‐up rate was >90%, even at 36 months. Seizure control improved over time with median seizure reduction of 25.0%, 40.9%, 53.3%, 60.0%, and 66.2%, and responder rates of 38.9%, 46.8%, 55.8%, 57.7%, and 58.8% at three, six, 12, 24, and 36 months of VNS therapy, respectively. There were no substantial changes in other indices throughout the three years of the study, except for self/family‐accessed QOL which improved over time. No new safety issues were identified. Conclusions. Although this was not a controlled comparative study, this prospective national registry of Japanese patients with drug‐resistant epilepsy, with >90% follow‐up rate, indicates long‐term efficacy of VNS therapy which increased over time, over a period of up to three years. The limits of such trials, in terms of AED modifications and during follow‐up and difficulties in seizure counting are also discussed.     

Comparison of the effectiveness and tolerability of perampanel and brivaracetam: a real‐world,observational, retrospective study

Aim. Perampanel (PER) and brivaracetam (BRV) are third‐generation antiseizure medications. The aim of the present retrospective, double‐centre study was to compare the effectiveness and tolerability between PER and BRV in adult patients with epilepsy. Methods. We reviewed the clinical charts of patients affected by epilepsy, admitted to the Epilepsy Centre at the University Hospital of Rome “Tor Vergata” and the Cardarelli Hospital in Naples, who started BRV or PER as add‐on treatment for controlling seizures with a follow‐up of 12 months. Seizure freedom, >50% seizure reduction, retention rate, and adverse events reported during follow‐up were compared between the two drugs. Moreover, we considered the effects of both drugs in specific subsets of patients: age ≥60 years, male or female, in patients with genetic generalized epilepsy, and considering previous treatment with levetiracetam (LEV). Results. Forty‐three patients treated with BRV and 64 patients treated with PER were included in this study and followed at both sites for 12 months. Similar effectiveness was observed between BRV and PER, with similar rates of seizure freedom (30% vs 31%) and >50% seizure reduction (32% vs 34%) during follow‐up. Moreover, PER and BRV discontinuation rates, due to ineffectiveness or adverse events, were similar. Groups of patients who started BRV or PER as first add‐on treatments were also compared but no differences in effectiveness or tolerability were identified. Lastly, BRV was shown to be more effective in patients who were not previously treated with LEV. Conclusions. This retrospective study reveals comparable effectiveness and tolerability between PER and BRV also when used as first add‐on treatments, in patients with epilepsy.     

NEOPLASM study: Real-life use of lacosamide in patients with brain tumor-related epilepsy

BackgroundThe choice of antiepileptic drug (AED) therapy in patients with brain tumor-related epilepsy (BTRE) is complicated, and there are a lack of robust clinical trial data to date.MethodsThe NEOPLASM (Neuroncologic Patients treated with LAcoSaMide) study was a 6-month, multicenter, retrospective, observational study in patients with BTRE treated with lacosamide. Patients were started on lacosamide because of a lack of efficacy or adverse events (AEs) with prior AEDs or suitability versus other AEDs, according to clinical practice. The primary efficacy variable was the seizure-free rate at 6 months. Safety variables included the proportion of patients with an AE and the proportion with an AE that led to discontinuation.ResultsOverall, 105 patients from 14 hospital centers were included in the analysis. Treatment with lacosamide for 6 months resulted in a 30.8% seizure-free rate, and 66.3% of patients had a ≥ 50% seizure reduction (responders). In the subset of patients included because of a lack of efficacy with prior AEDs, seizure-free rates were 28.0%, and 66.7% of patients were responders. No statistically significant differences in efficacy were observed according to the mechanism of action or enzyme-inducing properties of concomitant AEDs. Adverse events were reported by 41.9% of patients at 6 months, and 4.7% of them led to discontinuation. The most common AEs were somnolence/fatigue and dizziness. Notably, 57.1% of the patients who were switched to lacosamide because of AEs with their previous therapy did not report any AE at 6-month follow-up.ConclusionsIn this open-label, observational study, lacosamide appeared to be effective and well tolerated in a large population of patients with BTRE. Lacosamide may therefore be a promising option for the treatment of patients with BTRE.     

Quality of life,mood and seizure control in patients with brain tumor related epilepsy treated with lacosamide as add-on therapy: A prospective explorative study with a historical control group

ObjectiveBrain tumor-related epilepsy (BTRE) is often drug resistant and patients can be forced to take polytherapy that can adversely affect their quality of life (QoL). Lacosamide (LCM) is a new antiepileptic drug (AED) used as adjunctive therapy in patients with partial seizures with or without secondary generalization, with a favorable pharmacokinetic profile that seems to be effective and well tolerated.Therefore it represents a possible therapeutic choice for patients with BTRE. We propose a prospective study with a historical control group to evaluate the effect of LCM as add-on therapy on seizure control and quality of life in patients with BTRE. This study has been designed to test the superiority of Lacosamide over Levetiracetam as an add-on. We compared a prospective cohort of 25 patients treated with Lacosamide with a historical control group (n = 19) treated with Levetiracetam as an add-on.MethodsWe recruited 25 adult patients (M 18, F 7; mean age 41.9) affected by BTRE with uncontrolled partial-onset seizures treated with AED polytherapy. We added LCM as an add-on. Patients were evaluated at baseline, after 3 months and at 6 months.This population has been compared with a historical control group of 19 BTRE adult patients (M 13, F 6; median age 48.0, range: 28–70) with uncontrolled partial-onset seizures treated with LEV as add-on.The patients underwent QoL, mood and adverse events tests (Adverse Event Profile-AEP) and evaluation of seizure frequency.ResultsTwelve patients had high grade gliomas, and thirteen had low grade gliomas. During follow-up, thirteen patients underwent chemotherapy, three radiotherapy and five patients had disease progression. Nine patients had simple partial seizures, eight had complex partial seizures, and eight had secondary generalized seizures. Fifteen patients were in monotherapy and ten in polytherapy with AEDs. LCM was added up to reach the maximum dosage of 400 mg/die (mean final dose 300 mg/die). Four patients dropped out due to poor compliance and 1 for inefficacy.In the historical control group treated with LEV (mean final dose 2000 mg/die) 12 patients had high-grade gliomas, and 7 had low grade gliomas. Thirteen patients were in monotherapy and 6 in polytherapy with AEDs.In the 22 patients evaluable of 25 patients treated with LCM, we observed at final follow-up 7 patients seizure free, 12 with a significant reduction of seizures ≥ 50%, 2 stable and 1 patient with number of seizures increased.Mean seizure frequency at baseline compared with baseline period: the mean number of seizures significantly decreased from baseline (9.4) to final follow-up (1.2) (P = 0.005). The Responder Rate was 86.4%.Comparing responder rate of 22 evaluable patients with LCM with responder rate of 19 patients with LEV we didn't observe significant differences (p = 0.31).In our patients treated with LCM we didn't observe significant difference at 3 and 6 months in QoL tests results; we observe a significant reduction in the mean score of Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) and Barthel Index (BI) between baseline and 6 months of follow-up (KPS p = 0.003; BI p = 0.007).No clinical side effects were observed.ConclusionComparing the LCM with the historical group treated with LEV in add-on, we observed that LCM seems to have a higher clinical efficacy than LEV.In our patients, we did not observe any significant changes in QoL tests, indicating stability in all quality of life domains explored, despite the objective worsening in their functional status. Although this is a small series with a relatively short follow-up, our data indicates that LCM in add-on in patients with BTRE appears to be as effective as LEV in add-on, without impact on mood and quality of life.     

Surgery for drug‐resistant tuberous sclerosis complex‐associated epilepsy: who,when, and what

Objective: Tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC) is a multisystem genetic disorder associated with refractory early‐onset epilepsy. Current evidence supports surgery as the intervention most likely to achieve long‐term seizure freedom, but no specific guidelines are available on TSC pre‐surgical workup. This critical review assesses which TSC patients are suitable for surgical treatment, when pre‐surgical evaluation should start, and what degree of surgical resection is optimal for postsurgical outcome. Methods: We searched for publications from 2000 to 2020 in Pubmed and Embase using the terms “tuberous sclerosis,” “epilepsy,” and “epilepsy surgery”. To evaluate postsurgical seizure outcome, we selected only studies with at least one year of follow‐up. Results: Overall, we collected data on 1,026 patients from 34 studies. Age at surgery ranged from one month to 54 years. Mean age at surgery was 8.41 years. Of the diagnostic non‐invasive pre‐surgical tools, MRI and video‐EEG were considered most appropriate. Promising data for epileptogenic tuber detection is provided from invasive SEEG studies. Data on surgery and related outcome were available for 769 patients. Seizure freedom was seen in 64.4% of patients who underwent tuberectomy, 68.9% treated with lobectomy and 65.1% with multilobar resection. The most effective surgical approach was lobectomy, even though more recently tuberectomy associated with the resection of the perituberal area seems to be the best approach to reach seizure freedom. Published postsurgical seizure freedom rates in patients with TSC were between 65% and 75%, but reduced to 48%‐57% over longer follow‐up periods. Early surgery might positively affect neurodevelopmental trajectory in some patients, even though data on cognitive outcome are still to be confirmed with longitudinal studies. Significance: Considering the strong correlation between epilepsy duration and neurocognitive outcome, all patients with TSC ought to be referred early to a dedicated epilepsy centre for individually tailored pre‐surgical evaluation by a multi‐disciplinary epilepsy surgery team.     

Clobazam: An effective add‐on therapy in refractory status epilepticus

Refractory status epilepticus (RSE) is a medical emergency, with significant morbidity and mortality. The use and effectiveness of clobazam, a unique 1,5‐benzodiazepine, in the management of RSE has not been reported before. Over the last 24 months, we identified 17 patients with RSE who were treated with clobazam in our hospital. Eleven of the 17 patients had prior epilepsy. Fifteen patients had focal status epilepticus. Use of clobazam was prompted by a favorable pharmacokinetic profile devoid of drug interactions. Clobazam was introduced after a median duration of 4 days and after a median of three failed antiepileptic drugs. A successful response, defined as termination of RSE within 24 h of administration, without addition or modification of concurrent AED and with successful wean of anesthetic infusions, was seen in 13 patients. Indeterminate response was seen in three patients, whereas clobazam was unsuccessful in one patient. Clobazam averted the need for anesthetic infusions in five patients. Clobazam was well tolerated, and appears to be an effective and promising option as add‐on therapy in RSE. Its efficacy, particularly early in the course of SE, should be further investigated in prospective, randomized trials.     

A population‐based study of long‐term outcome of epilepsy in childhood with a focal or hemispheric lesion on neuroimaging

Purpose: To evaluate long‐term seizure outcome in children with epilepsy and a focal or hemispheric neuroimaging abnormality. Methods: All children (<18 years and residing in Olmsted County, Minnesota) with new‐onset epilepsy diagnosed between 1980 and 2004 and a single focal lesion on neuroimaging were identified by review of the Rochester Epidemiologic Project database. Outcomes were divided into three categories: (1) seizure freedom for 1 or more years at last follow‐up, (2) ongoing seizures but not medically intractable epilepsy, and (3) medically intractable epilepsy or undergoing epilepsy surgery. We also evaluated the proportion who achieved seizure control without surgical intervention and whether lesion type predicted intractability. Key Findings: Of the 359 children with newly diagnosed epilepsy, 37 (10%) had a focal or hemispheric lesion on neuroimaging. Median age of diagnosis was 89 months (25th percentile 26 months, 75th percentile 142 months) and at follow‐up was 137 months (25th percentile 95 months, 75th percentile 211 months). Eighty‐three percent of children with malformations of cortical development, 67% with mesial temporal sclerosis, 33% with encephalomalacia, and 50% with vascular malformations had intractable epilepsy at follow‐up or underwent resective surgery for medically intractable epilepsy. Among the different etiologies, presence of encephalomalacia predicted the lowest likelihood of medical intractability or undergoing surgery (p < 0.01). At final follow‐up, 24 (65%) of our entire cohort was seizure free. Following surgery, seizure freedom was achieved in 80% with mesial temporal sclerosis, 67% with encephalomalacia, 67% with vascular malformation, and 50% with malformations of cortical development. There was no statistically significant difference between the different etiologies on neuroimaging and seizure freedom after surgery. Twelve children (32%) achieved seizure freedom with medical management alone. Significance: Focal lesions on neuroimaging confer a high risk of medical intractability among children with new‐onset epilepsy. However, 32% of this cohort achieved seizure remission with medical management alone, including 58% with encephalomalacia and 33% with mesial temporal sclerosis.     

Efficacy and tolerability of zonisamide in juvenile myoclonic epilepsy.

The recommended treatment for juvenile myoclonic epilepsy (JME) is valproate (VPA). Recently, topiramate and lamotrigine have also been shown to be effective. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of zonisamide (ZNS) in the treatment of JME. We retrospectively analyzed the records of 15 patients (three M, 12 F, ages 11-20 years) diagnosed with JME at our institution during 2001-2003, and treated with ZNS. Generalized tonic-clonic (GTC), myoclonic and absence seizure response was assessed. The ZNS dose range was 200-500 mg/day (2.0-8.5 mg/kg/day). ZNS was started as the first drug, and as monotherapy, in 13 and was added to VPA in two patients. Follow-up range was 2-24 months (mean 12 months). Overall, 80% of patients on ZNS monotherapy showed good control (> or = 50% seizure reduction). Sixty-nine, 62 and 38% of patients were free of GTC, myoclonic, and absence seizures, respectively. Seizure control was achieved within four to eight weeks of attaining the maintenance dose. One patient on polytherapy had a 75% reduction in seizure frequency, whereas the other patient showed no response. There were no ZNS-VPA interactions. One patient stopped ZNS and was switched to VPA because of poor seizure control. Three patients (20%) experienced side effects (weight loss, headache, dizziness) during escalation, which resolved during maintenance. In this open-label, retrospective study, ZNS was shown to be an effective and well-tolerated drug in the treatment of patients with JME. The ease of titration, good safety profile, once-a-day dosing, lack of significant drug interaction, and short latency for onset of efficacy make ZNS an attractive therapeutic alternative for the treatment of JME.