Once-daily extended-release levetiracetam as adjunctive treatment of partial-onset seizures in patients with epilepsy: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

Purpose:   Double-blind randomized trial to assess efficacy and tolerability of once-daily extended-release levetiracetam (LEV XR) tablets (2 × 500 mg) as add-on therapy in patients (12–70 years old) with partial-onset seizures (POS) refractory to one to three antiepileptic drugs.
Methods:   After an 8-week prospective baseline-period, eligible patients were randomized (1:1) to once-daily LEV XR 1,000 mg/day or placebo for 12 weeks. Evaluations included changes from baseline in POS-frequency/week, responders (≥50% reduction in POS-frequency/week), seizure-freedom, adverse events, laboratory tests, physical and neurologic examinations, vital signs, body-weight, and 12-lead electrocardiogram.
Results:   Of 188 patients screened, 158 were randomized (intention-to-treat population): LEV XR (n = 79) or placebo (n = 79). Seventy-one (89.9%) LEV XR and 72 (91.1%) placebo patients completed the trial. Median POS-frequency/week reduction was 46.1% on LEV XR and 33.4% on placebo. Estimated reduction with LEV XR over placebo was 14.4% (p   =   0.038). Thirty-four (43%) LEV XR and 23 (29.1%) placebo patients experienced ≥50% reduction in POS-frequency/week. Eight (10.1%) patients receiving LEV XR and one (1.3%) receiving placebo were free of POS during the 12-week treatment period. Forty-one (53.2%) LEV XR and 43 (54.4%) placebo patients reported ≥1 adverse event. Adverse events reported with an incidence >5% and seen more often with LEV XR than with placebo were somnolence, influenza, irritability, nasopharyngitis, dizziness, and nausea .
Discussion:   Once-daily LEV XR 1,000 mg was effective and well-tolerated as adjunct therapy in patients with POS. Ten percent of patients randomized to LEV XR experienced freedom from POS. These results support the clinical value of this new LEV XR formulation.     

Eslicarbazepine acetate: a double-blind, add-on, placebo-controlled exploratory trial in adult patients with partial-onset seizures

OBJECTIVE: To explore the efficacy and safety of eslicarbazepine acetate (BIA 2-093), a new antiepileptic drug, as adjunctive therapy in adult patients with partial epilepsy. METHODS: A multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study was conducted in 143 refractory patients aged 18-65 years with >or=4 partial-onset seizures/month. The study consisted of a 12-week treatment period followed by a 1-week tapering off. Patients were randomly assigned to one of three groups: treatment with eslicarbazepine acetate once daily (QD, n=50), twice daily (BID, n=46), or placebo (PL, n=47). The daily dose was titrated from 400 mg to 800 mg and to 1,200 mg at 4-week intervals. The proportion of responders (patients with a >or=50% seizure reduction) was the primary end point. RESULTS: The percentage of responders versus baseline showed a statistically significant difference between QD and PL groups (54% vs. 28%; 90% CI =-infinity, -14; p=0.008). The difference between the BID (41%) and PL did not reach statistical significance (90% CI =-infinity, -1; p=0.12). A significantly higher proportion of responders in weeks 5-8 was found in the QD group than in the BID group (58% vs. 33%, respectively, p=0.022). At the end of the 12-week treatment, the number of seizure-free patients in the QD and BID groups was 24%, which was significantly different from the PL group. The incidence of adverse events was similar between the treatment groups and no drug-related serious adverse events occurred. CONCLUSION: Eslicarbazepine acetate was efficacious and well tolerated as an adjunctive therapy of refractory epileptic patients.     

Efficacy and safety of levetiracetam (up to 2000 mg/day) in Taiwanese patients with refractory partial seizures: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy and safety of adjunctive levetiracetam (LEV) therapy in controlling partial-onset seizures refractory to other antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in a multicenter study in Taiwanese adults. METHODS: Ninety-four patients aged 16-60 years with refractory partial seizures were randomized to receive LEV (n = 47) or placebo (47) for 14 weeks and composed the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. After the first 2 weeks, LEV patients had their dosage increased from 500 mg twice daily to 1,000 mg twice daily. A 12-week maintenance phase followed, after which patients switched to long-term, open-label LEV therapy or entered a 4-week phase of medication discontinuation. RESULTS: All patients from the ITT population, except one LEV-treated patient with missing seizure-count data, were included in the primary efficacy analysis. The least square mean of logarithmically transformed weekly partial-seizure frequency was significantly lower in the LEV than in the placebo group (0.813 vs. 1.085; p = 0.001). LEV reduced log-transformed weekly partial-seizure frequency by 23.8% (95% confidence interval, 10.4-35.2%) relative to placebo. Significantly more LEV than placebo patients (43.5% vs. 10.6%) experienced a response of a >or=50% decrease from baseline in weekly frequency of partial seizures [odds ratio, 6.5 (95% CI, 2.2-19.3); p < 0.001]. Adverse events were reported in 34 (72.3%) of 47 LEV-treated patients and 32 (68.1%) of 47 placebo patients. The three most common adverse events in the LEV and placebo groups were somnolence (40.4% and 14.9%), dizziness (14.9% and 8.5%), and headache (10.6% and 8.5%), respectively. Only four patients (three LEV-treated patients and one placebo patient) were withdrawn from the study because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive LEV therapy, 相似文献   

Multicenter double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of levetiracetam as add-on therapy in patients with refractory partial seizures. European Levetiracetam Study Group

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of levetiracetam (LEV, Keppra) as add-on therapy in patients with refractory partial seizures. METHODS: In this European multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, LEV (500 or 1,000 mg twice daily) was compared with placebo as add-on therapy in 324 patients with uncontrolled simple or complex partial seizures, or both, with or without secondary generalization. After enrollment, three parallel groups were assessed during a baseline period of 8 or 12 weeks, followed by a 4-week titration interval and a 12-week evaluation period. RESULTS: LEV significantly decreased partial seizure frequency compared with placebo. A reduction in seizure frequency of > or =50% occurred in 22.8% of patients in the 1,000-mg group and 31.6% of patients in the 2,000-mg group, compared with 10.4% of patients in the placebo group. Administration of LEV did not affect plasma concentrations of concomitant antiepileptic drugs or alter vital signs or laboratory parameters. No significant difference in the incidence of adverse events was observed between treatment groups (70.8% for the 1,000-mg group and 75.5% for the 2,000-mg group), or between the LEV and placebo groups (73.2% for placebo group). The most commonly reported adverse effects in the LEV group were asthenia, headache, and somnolence. CONCLUSIONS: The antiepileptic efficacy and tolerability of LEV (1,000 mg/d and 2,000 mg/d, administered in two divided doses) as add-on therapy was established in patients with refractory partial seizures in this clinical study.     

多中心双盲、随机、安慰剂对照评价左乙拉西坦添加治疗难治性部分性癫(癎)发作的疗效及安全性

目的 评价左乙拉西坦(LEV)添加用药治疗难治性部分性癫(癎)发作的临床疗效及安全性.方法 随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、多中心平行设计添加治疗,确诊为有癫(癎)部分性发作的202例癫(癎)患者,平均年龄(32.8±12.7)岁,随机分配入LEV治疗组(n=102)与安慰剂组(n=100).在回顾8周基线期的癫(癎)发作频率后,进入逐量加药期.初始用药剂量为0.5 g,每日2次,2周后增加至1.0 g,每日2次服用,4周后加量至1.5 g,每日2次,随后维持该剂量治疗12周,最后逐渐减量并转入LEV开放治疗期.主要评价指标为16周治疗期内每周癫(癎)发作频率的比较、得出药物治疗发作频率减少50%有效率、安全性和药物不良反应.结果 在16周治疗期内,LEV组每周癫(癎)发作频率明显减少,较安慰剂组减少26.8%;每周发作频率较基线期下降数在LEV组与安慰剂组的组间差异为42.2%;部分性发作频率减少50%有效率为55.9%,与安慰剂组比的OR值为3.6;有11例治疗后完全无发作,两组相比均有显著统计学意义(P＜0.001).LEV组的主要不良事件为嗜睡、头晕、无力及血小板减少,但与安慰剂组比差异无统计学意义.结论 LEV添加用药治疗成人难治性部分性癫(癎)发作,可以显著减少癫(癎)发作频率,安全性良好.     

Adjunctive levetiracetam in infants and young children with refractory partial-onset seizures

Purpose:   To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive levetiracetam in very young children (aged 1 month to <4 years) with partial-onset seizures inadequately controlled with one or two antiepileptic drugs.
Methods:   This multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study consisted of a 48-h inpatient baseline video-EEG (electroencephalography) and a 5-day inpatient treatment period (1-day up-titration; 48-h evaluation video-EEG in the last 2 days). Children who experienced at least two partial-onset seizures during the 48-h baseline video-EEG were randomized to either levetiracetam [40 mg/kg/day (age 1 to <6 months); 50 mg/kg/day (age ≥6 months to <4 years] or placebo.
Results:   Of 175 patients screened, 116 patients were randomized [60 levetiracetam; 56 placebo; intent-to-treat (ITT) population], and 111 completed the study. The responder rate in average daily partial-onset seizures frequency (48-h video-EEG monitoring; primary efficacy variable) was 43.1% for levetiracetam [modified ITT (mITT) = 58] versus 19.6% for placebo (mITT = 51; p=0.013), with odds ratio for response 3.11 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.22–8.26]. The median percent reduction from baseline in average daily partial-onset seizure frequency was 43.6% for levetiracetam and 7.1% for placebo with a median difference between treatment groups of 39.2% (95% CI, 17.5–62.2; p   <   0.001). In general, levetiracetam was well tolerated. Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported by 55.0% levetiracetam- and 44.6% placebo-treated patients (ITT population). The most frequently reported adverse events were somnolence (13.3% levetiracetam, 1.8% placebo) and irritability (11.7% levetiracetam, 0% placebo).
Discussion:   Adjunctive levetiracetam is an efficacious and well-tolerated treatment for partial-onset seizures in infants and young children.     

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study of rufinamide as adjunctive therapy for refractory partial-onset seizures

Purpose: Efficacy and safety of adjunctive rufinamide (3,200 mg/day) was assessed in adolescents and adults with inadequately controlled partial‐onset seizures receiving maintenance therapy with up to three antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Methods: This randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, parallel‐group, multicenter study comprised a 56‐day baseline phase (BP), 12‐day titration phase, and 84‐day maintenance phase (MP). The primary efficacy variable was percentage change in total partial seizure frequency per 28 days (MP vs. BP). Secondary efficacy outcome measures included ≥50% responder rate and reduction in mean total partial seizure frequency during the MP. Safety and tolerability evaluation included adverse events (AEs), physical and neurologic examinations, and laboratory values. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic assessments were conducted. Results: Three hundred fifty‐seven patients were randomized: 176 to rufinamide and 181 to placebo. Patients had a median of 13.3 seizures per 28 days during BP; 86% were receiving ≥2 AEDs. For the intent‐to‐treat population, the median percentage reduction in total partial seizure frequency per 28 days was 23.25 for rufinamide versus 9.80 for placebo (p = 0.007). Rufinamide‐treated patients were more than twice as likely to have had a ≥50% reduction in partial seizure frequency (32.5% vs. 14.3%; p < 0.001) and had a greater reduction in median total partial seizure rate per 28 days during the MP (13.2 vs. 5.2; p < 0.001). Treatment‐emergent AEs occurring at ≥5% higher incidence in the rufinamide group compared with placebo were dizziness, fatigue, nausea, somnolence, and diplopia. Conclusions: Adjunctive treatment with rufinamide reduced total partial seizures in refractory patients. AEs reported were consistent with the known tolerability profile of rufinamide.     

Pregabalin add-on treatment: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-response study in adults with partial seizures

Summary: Purpose: To evaluate pregabalin (PGB), 150 mg/day, and PGB, 600 mg/day, as an add‐on treatment for patients with refractory partial seizures concurrently treated with one to three anticonvulsants (AEDs). Methods: An international (13 countries), multicenter (45 centers), 12‐week, double‐blind, randomized study in which patients with partial seizures received placebo (n = 96); PGB, 150 mg/day (n = 99); or PGB, 600 mg/day (n = 92); given 3 times a day (t.i.d.). The primary efficacy criterion was reduction in seizure frequency during treatment as compared with baseline, as measured by RRatio, the symmetrical percentage change in seizure rates determined from daily seizure diaries. The RRatio between the 8‐week baseline (pretreatment phase) and the 12‐week treatment period were compared between each of the PGB groups and the placebo group by using an analysis of variance analysis of the intent‐to‐treat population. Results: PGB, 150 mg/day and 600 mg/day, were both significantly more effective than placebo in reducing the RRatio [–11.5 (p = 0.0007) and –31.4 (p ≤ 0.0001), respectively, vs. 0.9]. These RRatio values correspond to seizure‐frequency reductions from baseline of –1.8, 20.6, and 47.8% for placebo, 150 mg/day, and 600 mg/day, respectively. PGB efficacy was significantly dose related (p ≤ 0.0001). Secondary efficacy variables corroborated the findings of the primary analysis. Significantly more patients were responders (≥50% reduction in seizure frequency) in the PGB, 600 mg/day (43.5%), group than in the placebo group (6.2%) (p ≤ 0.001). PGB was well tolerated. Dose‐related, treatment‐emergent adverse events (≥10%), mostly mild or moderate in intensity, were somnolence, dizziness, ataxia, diplopia, and weight gain. The withdrawal rate due to adverse events was 10% of patients at 150 mg/day and 18.5% of patients at 600 mg/day, compared with 6.2% of patients receiving placebo. Conclusions: PGB, 150 mg/day and 600 mg/day, is highly effective and well‐tolerated add‐on therapy in patients with partial seizures.     

Double-blind placebo-controlled trial of flunarizine as add-on therapy in epilepsy

In a therapy-resistant epileptic population with partial complex seizures with or without secondary generalization, addition of flunarizine to existing therapy was accompanied by a significant reduction in complex partial and tonic-clonic seizures. This result did not appear to be due to serial effects or changes in the plasma levels of the co-medication. Side effects were rare. The serum flunarizine levels (13.8 ng/ml; range, 3-32.5 ng/ml) were lower than previously reported on a daily dose of 10 mg. This may reflect increased metabolism due to induction of liver enzymes by the co-medication. Given this finding, together with the low incidence of side effects, a further study is required to determine whether higher blood levels would give an improved degree and incidence of seizure reduction.     

Levetiracetam efficacy in refractory partial-onset seizures,especially after failed epilepsy surgery

PURPOSE: We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the efficacy of levetiracetam as adjunctive therapy in patients with localization-related epilepsy, and specifically in the subset of patients for whom epilepsy surgery failed. METHODS: Eighty-two patients with uncontrolled partial-onset seizures treated with levetiracetam were identified; epilepsy surgery had failed for 21 (25.6%; group I), and 61 (74.4%) had no prior surgery (group II). Group I and group II patients were comparable in age (mean, 40.7 vs. 41.5 years) and age at seizure onset (mean, 14.4 vs. 18.2 years). Patients who had >/=50% reduction in seizure frequency were considered responders; the remaining patients were considered nonresponders. RESULTS: In patients (group I) for whom surgery had failed, responder rate was 76.1% (16 of 21), including 10 (47.6%) patients who became seizure free. In nonsurgical patients (group II), responder rate was 34.3% (21 of 61), including nine (14.7%) patients who became seizure free. In group I, 11 (91.6%) of 12 temporal resection patients were responders, of whom eight were seizure free; of the remaining nine operated (extratemporal) patients, five (55.5%) were responders, and two were seizure free. In three responders, all in group I, a severe, delayed psychotic syndrome developed 4 to 9 months after levetiracetam introduction, leading to its discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that adjunctive levetiracetam therapy should be considered early after failed epilepsy surgery, especially after temporal resection, and may have implications for its use before surgical intervention. Patients should be under close psychiatric observation in this clinical setting.     

Levetiracetam extended release and levetiracetam immediate release as adjunctive treatment for partial-onset seizures: An indirect comparison of treatment-emergent adverse events using meta-analytic techniques

The safety profiles of once-daily adjunctive levetiracetam (LEV) extended release (XR) (1000 mg/day) and adjunctive LEV immediate release (IR) (500 mg twice daily) were compared using data from three randomized, placebo (PBO)-controlled phase III clinical trials in patients with partial-onset seizures. MedDRA 9.0 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were indirectly compared using meta-analytic techniques, including calculation of risk difference (RD) and mixed-effects analysis. Statistical significance was set at 10% alpha risk, the normative value for these analyses. Data from 555 patients older than 16 (204 LEV IR, 70 LEV XR, 281 PBO) were analyzed. Following adjustment for incidence of placebo TEAEs, LEV XR showed statistically significantly lower rates of TEAEs than LEV IR across nervous system disorders (RD = −18%, P = 0.03), psychiatric disorders (RD = −11%, P = 0.08), and metabolism and nutrition disorders (RD = −3%, P = 0.08). Among nervous system disorders, the RD for headache favored LEV XR (RD = −11%, P = 0.08). These results suggest that adjunctive LEV XR may be associated with a lower incidence of nervous system, psychiatric, and nutritional and metabolic TEAEs as compared with LEV IR. However, this difference was observed at a broad scale and not at a specific TEAE level except for headache.     

Intravenous lacosamide as replacement for oral lacosamide in patients with partial-onset seizures

PURPOSE: This multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, inpatient trial evaluated the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of intravenous lacosamide as replacement for oral lacosamide in patients with partial-onset seizures. METHODS: Patients were enrolled from an ongoing open-label extension trial of oral lacosamide and randomized (2:1) to either intravenous lacosamide and oral placebo or intravenous placebo and oral lacosamide. During the 2-day inpatient treatment period, patients received twice-daily doses of lacosamide equivalent to their current daily dose of oral lacosamide. The first 30 patients enrolled received infusions with 60-min durations and the next 30 received infusions with 30-min durations. RESULTS: Of 60 patients randomized, 59 completed the trial. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were reported by 16 patients and included dizziness, headache, back pain, somnolence, and injection site pain. The tolerability profile of intravenous lacosamide was consistent with that of oral lacosamide. All AEs were considered mild or moderate in intensity, and no serious AEs or AEs leading to withdrawal were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous lacosamide, administered as 60- or 30-min twice-daily infusions, showed a similar safety and tolerability profile to oral lacosamide when used as replacement therapy. Results from this trial support further investigation of intravenous lacosamide at shorter infusion durations.     

多中心、随机、双盲、安慰剂对照评价唑尼沙胺添加治疗癫(癎)部分性发作的疗效和安全性

目的 评价唑尼沙胺作为添加治疗癫(癎)部分性发作的疗效和安全性.方法 确诊为有癫(癎)部分性发作的217例癫(癎)患者,随机分配入唑尼沙胺治疗组(n=111)与安慰剂组(n=106)进行随机、双盲、安慰剂对照、多中心平行设计添加治疗.在3个月回顾性基线期后,给予患者初始剂量唑尼沙胺(100 mg/片)或安慰剂每次1片,每日1次口服,4周内递增至每次2片,每日2次.分别在治疗0、2、4、8、12和16周时进行随访.主要疗效指标为治疗结束后与基线期比较发作次数减少的中位百分比;次要疗效指标为发作次数减少大于50%的比例.同时观察研究药物的安全性与不良反应情况.结果 总发作次数减少率中位数在唑尼沙胺组为33.33%,安慰剂组为0;唑尼沙胺组总发作次数减少>50%者38例(34.23%),安慰剂组21例(19.81%),差异有统计学意义(χ3=5.7159,P=0.0168).唑尼沙胺组治疗后无发作13例(11.71%),有效25例(22.52%),临床有效率为34.23%;安慰剂组无发作5例(4.72%),有效16例(15.09%),临床有效率为19.81%,2组间比较差异有统计学意义(U=2.4701,P=0.0135).唑尼沙胺组与安慰剂组比较,其不良反应发生率差异无统计学意义,唑尼沙胺组较常见的不良反应有思睡、乏力、食欲下降、胃肠道不适、失眠和便秘.结论 唑尼沙胺作为部分性癫(癎)发作的添加药物有确定的疗效,安全耐受性较好,具有一定临床应用价值.     

Neurocognitive effects of adjunctive levetiracetam in children with partial-onset seizures: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, noninferiority trial

Purpose : Evaluate potential neurocognitive effects of adjunctive levetiracetam in children with inadequately controlled partial‐onset seizures (POS). Methods : Randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, noninferiority safety study. Children (4–16 years; IQ ≥65) with ≥1 POS during 4 weeks before screening despite taking 1–2 antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) were randomized (2:1) to levetiracetam (20–60 mg/kg/day) or placebo for 12 weeks. Results : Ninety‐nine patients were randomized with 98 (levetiracetam 64, placebo 34) in intent‐to‐treat (ITT) and 73 (levetiracetam 46, placebo 27) in per protocol (PP) populations. Primary cognitive assessment was the Leiter International Performance Scale–Revised Attention and Memory Battery with the memory screen composite score change from baseline as the primary endpoint. PP Least Square Mean [LSM (standard error)] were 5.36 (1.78) for levetiracetam; 5.17 (2.33) for placebo; difference [two‐sided 90% confidence interval (CI)] 0.19 (?4.69, 5.08). Levetiracetam was noninferior to placebo because the 90% CI lower bound was greater than the defined noninferiority margin (?9.0). There were no statistically significant differences between groups in Wide Range Assessment of Memory and Learning‐2 indexes and Leiter‐R Examiner’s Rating Scale scores. Median reductions from baseline in weekly POS frequency were 91.5% versus 26.5% for levetiracetam versus placebo; ≥50% responder rates: 62.5% versus 41.2%; seizure freedom rates: 46.9% versus 8.8% (ITT). Adverse events were reported by 89.1% levetiracetam‐treated and 85.3% placebo‐treated patients; those reported by ≥10% levetiracetam patients and more often with levetiracetam were headache, nasopharyngitis, fatigue, vomiting, somnolence, and aggression. Discussion : Neurocognitive effects were no different in pediatric patients with POS treated with adjunctive levetiracetam or placebo. Levetiracetam was effective and well tolerated.     

Efficacy and safety of eslicarbazepine acetate as adjunctive treatment in adults with refractory partial-onset seizures: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group phase III study

Purpose: To study the efficacy and safety of eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) as adjunctive therapy for refractory partial seizures in adults with ≥4 partial‐onset seizures (simple or complex, with or without secondary generalization) per 4 weeks despite treatment with 1–2 antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Methods: This multicenter, parallel‐group study had an 8‐week, single‐blind, placebo baseline phase, after which patients were randomized to placebo (n = 102) or once‐daily ESL 400 mg (n = 100), 800 mg (n = 98), or 1,200 mg (n = 102) in the double‐blind treatment phase. ESL starting dose was 400 mg; thereafter, ESL was titrated at weekly 400‐mg steps to the full maintenance dose (12 weeks). Results: Seizure frequency adjusted per 4 weeks over the maintenance period (primary endpoint) was significantly lower than placebo in the ESL 1,200‐mg (p = 0.0003) and 800‐mg (p = 0.0028) groups [analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) of log‐transformed seizure frequency]. Responder rate was 20% (placebo), 23% (400 mg), 34% (800 mg), and 43% (1,200 mg). Median relative reduction in seizure frequency was 16% (placebo), 26% (400 mg), 36% (800 mg), and 45% (1,200 mg). The most frequent concomitant AEDs were carbamazepine (56–62% of patients), lamotrigine (25–27%), and valproic acid (22–28%). Similar efficacy results were obtained in patients administered ESL with or without carbamazepine as concomitant AED. Discontinuation rates caused by adverse events (AEs) were 3.9% (placebo), 4% (400 mg), 8.2% (800 mg), and 19.6% (1,200 mg). AEs in >10% of any group were dizziness, headache, and diplopia. Most AEs were mild or moderate. Discussion: ESL, 800 and 1,200 mg once‐daily, was well tolerated and more effective than placebo in patients who were refractory to treatment with one or two concomitant AEDs.     

Efficacy and safety of oral lacosamide as adjunctive therapy in adults with partial-onset seizures

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of lacosamide when added to 1 or 2 antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in adults with uncontrolled partial-onset seizures, and assess plasma concentrations of concomitant AEDs to determine any potential for drug interactions. METHODS: During this multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, patients were randomized to placebo or lacosamide 200, 400, or 600 mg/day after an 8-week baseline period. Lacosamide was titrated in weekly increments of 100 mg/day over 6 weeks and maintained for 12 weeks. Results were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS: Four hundred eighteen patients were randomized and received trial medication; 312 completed the trial. The median percent reduction in seizure frequency per 28 days was 10%, 26%, 39%, and 40% in the placebo, lacosamide 200, 400, and 600 mg/day treatment groups, respectively. The median percent reduction in seizure frequency over placebo was significant for lacosamide 400 mg/day (p=0.0023) and 600 mg/day (p=0.0084). The 50% responder rates were 22%, 33%, 41%, and 38% for placebo, lacosamide 200, 400, and 600 mg/day, respectively. The 50% responder rate over placebo was significant for lacosamide 400 mg/day (p=0.0038) and 600 mg/day (p=0.0141). Adverse events that appeared dose-related included dizziness, nausea, fatigue, ataxia, vision abnormal, diplopia, and nystagmus. Lacosamide did not affect mean plasma concentrations of concomitantly administered AEDs. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, adjunctive lacosamide significantly reduced seizure frequency in patients with uncontrolled partial-onset seizures. Along with favorable pharmacokinetic and tolerability profiles, these results support further development of lacosamide as an AED.     

Adjunctive lacosamide for partial-onset seizures: Efficacy and safety results from a randomized controlled trial

Purpose:   To evaluate the efficacy and safety of lacosamide (200 and 400 mg/day) when added to one to three concomitant antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) in patients with uncontrolled partial-onset seizures.
Methods:   This multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial randomized patients (age 16–70 years) with partial-onset seizures with or without secondary generalization to placebo, lacosamide 200, or lacosamide 400 mg/day. The trial consisted of an 8-week baseline, a 4-week titration, and a 12-week maintenance period.
Results:   Four hundred eighty-five patients were randomized and received trial medication. Among these, 87% were taking two or more concomitant AEDs. Median percent reduction in seizure frequency per 28 days from baseline to maintenance period (intent-to-treat, ITT) was 20.5% for placebo, 35.3% for lacosamide 200 mg/day (p   =   0.02), and 36.4% for 400 mg/day (p   =   0.03). In the per protocol population, the reductions were 35.3% for lacosamide 200 mg/day (p   =   0.04) and 44.9% for 400 mg/day (p   =   0.01) compared to placebo (25.4%). The 50% responder rate for lacosamide 400 mg/day (40.5%) was significant (p   =   0.01) over placebo (25.8%), but was not for 200 mg/day (35.0%). In the per protocol population, the 50% responder rate for lacosamide 400 mg/day (46.3%) was significant (p   <   0.01) compared with the placebo responder rate (27.5%). Dose-related adverse events (AEs) included dizziness, nausea, and vomiting. Clinically relevant changes in the mean plasma concentrations of commonly used AEDs were not observed.
Discussion:   Results of this trial demonstrated the efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive lacosamide 200 and 400 mg/day and support that lacosamide may be an advantageous option for the treatment of partial-onset seizures in patients with epilepsy.     

Dose-dependent safety and efficacy of zonisamide: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in patients with refractory partial seizures

PURPOSE: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of zonisamide (ZNS) as adjunctive treatment in patients with refractory localization-related epilepsy. METHODS: This was a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of adjunctive ZNS in 351 patients with refractory partial seizures receiving a stable regimen of one to three antiepileptic drugs (AEDs). Patients were randomized to placebo or ZNS, 100 mg, 300 mg, or 500 mg/day (2:1:1:2) after a 12-week baseline. Dose titration was undertaken over a 6-week titration phase, which was followed by an 18-week fixed-dose assessment phase. Primary efficacy parameters were the differences between ZNS, 500 mg/day, and placebo in the change from baseline in frequency of complex partial (CP) seizures during the fixed-dose assessment phase and in the proportion of CP responders (> or =50% decrease from baseline in seizure frequency). Safety and tolerability also were assessed. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, the highest dose of ZNS (500 mg/day) resulted in a significantly greater decrease in CP seizure frequency from baseline (51.2% vs. 16.3%; p < 0.0001) and a significantly higher proportion of CP responders (52.3% vs. 21.3%; p < 0.001). Both ZNS, 500 mg/day, and 300 mg/day were statistically superior to placebo in reducing the frequency of "all seizures" and simple partial (SP) + CP seizures. For all seizures, a significant dose-response relation was observed (p < 0.0001).The most common adverse events were somnolence, headache, dizziness, and nausea during the titration phase and headache and pharyngitis during the fixed-dose assessment phase. CONCLUSIONS: ZNS provides dose-dependent, effective, and generally well-tolerated adjunctive therapy in patients with partial seizures.     

托吡酯多中心开放性添加治疗成人难治性癫痫部分性发作的临床观察

目的 评价托吡酯（topiramate,TPM)对难治性癫痫部分性发作的疗效及耐受性。方法 采用多中心开放性试验的方法对全国52家医院的431例病人进行托吡酯添加治疗。本研究包括8周基础期、8周加量期及12周稳定观察期。在8周基础期,病人虽用1－3种抗癫痫药治疗,但仍有每月至少4次的发作;在加量期,TPM开始量为25mg/d,持续1周,以后每周增加25mg/d,直到目标剂量达到200mg/d,维持此剂量12周为稳定观察期。结果 431例病人参加此项研究,其中癫痫发作频率减少≥50％者为326例（75．6％）,≥75％者为257例（59．6％）,减少100％者为91例（21．1％）。18例（4．2％）发作频率增加≥25％。就发作类型而言,癫痫发作频率减少 ≥50％者中,单纯部分性发作（SPS）为83．4％,复杂部分性发作（CPS）为74．4％,部分发作继发全身性发作为82．1％。未出现严重的副作用。结论 TPM对癫痫部分性发作伴有或不伴有继发全身性发作者有效,口服安全。     

Seizure-free days observed in randomized placebo-controlled add-on trials with levetiracetam in partial epilepsy

PURPOSE: We examined the effect of adjunctive levetiracetam (LEV; 1,000 to 3,000 mg/day) on the number of seizure-free days gained per quarter in adult patients with refractory partial-onset epilepsy. METHODS: The treatment effect was studied in a meta-analysis using individual patient data of a subpopulation of patients (n = 846) emerging from the three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trials (n = 904). RESULTS: Adding LEV effectively increased the number of days without seizures by 5.19 days per quarter [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.63-6.76; p = 0.0001; titration and stable dose periods]. CONCLUSIONS: LEV adjunctive treatment shows a clear benefit in terms of seizure-free days gained for patients with refractory epilepsy. This gain is significant for the pooled and for each LEV dose compared with placebo.