An open-label study of levetiracetam at individualised doses between 1000 and 3000 mg day(-1) in adult patients with refractory epilepsy.

BACKGROUND: The novel antiepileptic drug (AED) levetiracetam (LEV, Keppra) is indicated as adjunctive therapy for partial epilepsy. The primary aim of this study was to measure the safety and tolerability of LEV individualised dosing in a heterogeneous refractory epilepsy population.METHODS: LEV was evaluated in a 10- to 16-week open-label, multicentre study in adult patients with epilepsy refractory to previous treatment with at least two AEDs. Individualised LEV doses up to 3000 mg x day(-1) were determined in an initial up-titration phase, and optimal doses were administered as adjunctive treatment during an 8- to 10-week evaluation period. Concomitant AEDs and their doses could not be changed during the study. Safety and tolerability were monitored by expression of adverse events as well as by retention rate. The effect of LEV on concomitant AED concentration was also studied. Efficacy was assessed using global clinical evaluation (GCE) scores, seizure frequency, and >or=50% responder rate. RESULTS: LEV therapy was initiated in 219 patients; 183 had localisation-related epilepsy and 37 had generalised epilepsy. In one patient, epileptic syndrome was defined as both localisation-related and generalised. About 81.7% (179/219) continued and completed treatment throughout the study, and 79% (172/219) chose to continue LEV in a follow-up study. The most common adverse events were asthenia, dizziness, and somnolence. Most adverse events occurred during up-titration. LEV treatment did not alter the concentration of concomitant AEDs. LEV improved GCE scores in 79.5% (152/191) of patients. LEV reduced the median total seizure frequency of all patients from a median of 2.25 seizures per week at baseline (n=219) to 1.10 seizures per week during the evaluation period (n=191 patients with at least one seizure count during evaluation). The >or=50% responder rate was 48.2% for all seizure types, 49.4% for partial-onset, and 51.4% for generalised-onset seizures. Throughout the evaluation period (i.e. from the start of the evaluation period until completion or early discontinuation), 26/191 (13.6%) had a 100% reduction in total seizure frequency, while in a follow-up study, 10.5% (18/172) were seizure-free for at least 6 months and 6.4% (11/172) were seizure-free for at least 1 year. CONCLUSION: LEV was well tolerated, as evidenced by limited adverse event reporting and the high retention rate, and appeared effective in both generalised and partial epilepsy.     

Levetiracetam in patients with refractory epilepsy: results of the SKATE trial in Austria, Germany and Switzerland.

PURPOSE: To further evaluate the safety, efficacy and optimal dose of levetiracetam (LEV) in daily clinical practice among patients with uncontrolled partial epilepsy with or without secondary generalization. METHODS: In this phase IV, open-label, 16-week community-based study, 178 at least 16-year-old patients with refractory focal epilepsy were treated with 1000, 2000 or 3000 mg levetiracetam as adjunctive therapy. All patients started with 500 mg LEV b.i.d. (1000 mg/day); the dose was adjusted in 2-week intervals up to 1500 b.i.d. (3000 mg/day) depending on seizure control and tolerability. The main objectives were the adverse events, the percentage reduction in partial and total seizure frequency per week from baseline and the retention rate, defined as the percentage of patients taking LEV at the end of the 16-week treatment period. RESULTS: Of the 178 patients who took at least one dose of LEV 151 completed the study. Thus, the retention rate (number of patients taking LEV at the end of the 16-week treatment period) was 84.8%. Most frequently reported adverse events were asthenia, dizziness, headache, nausea, somnolence and hostility; the majority of these events were of mild to moderate intensity. The seizure-free rate of the ITT population with focal seizures was 16.7%, for all seizures 16.6%; the median reduction of focal seizure frequency was 47.6%, and 46.5% for all seizures. The 50% responder rate was 46.6% for focal seizures and 45.1% for all seizures. CONCLUSION: Add-on treatment with LEV in patients with refractory partial epilepsy was safe and effective in this study.     

Levetiracetam in the treatment of childhood epilepsy

Epilepsy is a common pediatric neurologic disorder that is difficult to manage in a substantial portion of children. Levetiracetam (LEV) is a novel antiepileptic drug (AED) that has recently been approved as add-on treatment for various seizure types in epilepsy populations that include children: for refractory partial seizures in epilepsy patients ≥4 years old, for myoclonic seizures in juvenile myoclonic epilepsy patients ≥12 years old, and for primary generalized tonic-clonic seizures in idiopathic generalized epilepsy patients (≥6 years old with FDA approval; ≥12 years old with EMEA approval). A review of published pediatric studies indicates that the efficacy of LEV is best established for partial seizures; however, results from recent double-blind and open-label trials indicate that adjunctive LEV also controls generalized seizures – particularly myoclonic and generalized tonic-clonic – in children and adolescents with primary generalized epilepsy. LEV was well-tolerated in pediatric studies. The most common adverse events (AEs) reported were sedation related. Behavioral AEs were among the most commonly reported events in some trials; conversely, improvements in behavior and cognition were also frequently reported. LEV appears to be a safe and effective AED with unique characteristics that benefit the treatment of children with epilepsy.     

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.     

Levetiracetam for people with mental retardation and refractory epilepsy

Levetiracetam (LEV) is a novel antiepileptic drug (AED) with efficacy against a wide range of seizures types. The aim of this observational study was to assess its effectiveness in patients with mental retardation and refractory epilepsy. Sixty-four patients were started on adjunctive LEV after a 3-month baseline. LEV was initially dosed at 250 mg daily and increased by 250 mg every 2 weeks thereafter according to clinical response. Caregivers rated the patient's sleep, appetite, alertness, and behavior as poor (1), reasonable (2), or good (3) at each clinic visit. Patients were reviewed until one of four endpoints was reached: seizure freedom for at least 6 months, > or = 50% reduction in seizure frequency (responder) over a 6-month period, <50% reduction in seizure frequency (marginal effect) over a 6-month period, or LEV withdrawal due to lack of efficacy, adverse effects, or both. Twenty-four (38%) patients became seizure-free, 10 of whom were controlled on LEV 250 mg twice daily. An additional 18 (28%) patients were classified as responders, and 8 (12%) reported only marginal benefit from adjunctive LEV. Fourteen (22%) patients discontinued LEV (6 worsening seizures, 1 lack of efficacy, 7 adverse effects). Caregivers rated combined sleep, appetite, alertness, and behavior scores as "improved" at the end of follow-up (P<0.001). LEV improved seizure control in the majority of patients with mental retardation and may also have enhanced their quality of life.     

Brivaracetam: Rationale for discovery and preclinical profile of a selective SV2A ligand for epilepsy treatment

Despite availability of effective antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), many patients with epilepsy continue to experience refractory seizures and adverse events. Achievement of better seizure control and fewer side effects is key to improving quality of life. This review describes the rationale for the discovery and preclinical profile of brivaracetam (BRV), currently under regulatory review as adjunctive therapy for adults with partial‐onset seizures. The discovery of BRV was triggered by the novel mechanism of action and atypical properties of levetiracetam (LEV) in preclinical seizure and epilepsy models. LEV is associated with several mechanisms that may contribute to its antiepileptic properties and adverse effect profile. Early findings observed a moderate affinity for a unique brain‐specific LEV binding site (LBS) that correlated with anticonvulsant effects in animal models of epilepsy. This provided a promising molecular target and rationale for identifying selective, high‐affinity ligands for LBS with potential for improved antiepileptic properties. The later discovery that synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A) was the molecular correlate of LBS confirmed the novelty of the target. A drug discovery program resulted in the identification of anticonvulsants, comprising two distinct families of high‐affinity SV2A ligands possessing different pharmacologic properties. Among these, BRV differed significantly from LEV by its selective, high affinity and differential interaction with SV2A as well as a higher lipophilicity, correlating with more potent and complete seizure suppression, as well as a more rapid brain penetration in preclinical models. Initial studies in animal models also revealed BRV had a greater antiepileptogenic potential than LEV. These properties of BRV highlight its promising potential as an AED that might provide broad‐spectrum efficacy, associated with a promising tolerability profile and a fast onset of action. BRV represents the first selective SV2A ligand for epilepsy treatment and may add a significant contribution to the existing armamentarium of AEDs.     

Evidence for sustained efficacy of levetiracetam as add-on epilepsy therapy

PURPOSE: To evaluate the long-term clinical usefulness of levetiracetam (LEV, Keppra((R))(1)) as add-on therapy in patients with refractory epilepsy. METHODS: Data for all 1422 patients with refractory epilepsy treated with LEV during the development program were analyzed for changes in seizure frequency per week, seizure freedom, and adverse events. RESULTS: Median percent reduction from baseline in seizure frequency per week over the whole treatment period was 39.6%, and no decrease over time was observed within each cohort exposed to LEV for durations ranging from 6 to 54 months. The median treatment period was 399 days (range 1-8 years). The proportion of responders during the first 3 months of LEV treatment was 39.2%. This proportion remained stable at 6 months (36.1%). Overall, 38.6 and 20.1% of patients had reductions in seizure frequency of at least 50 and 75%. Sixty-five (4.6%) patients were seizure-free over their entire treatment period, compared with 167 (11.7%) and 126 (8.9%) during their last 6 and 12 months of follow-up. Ninety-seven (19.8%) of 491 patients who received only one other antiepileptic drug (AED) in addition to LEV were seizure-free during their last 6 months. The proportion of patients who reduced their number of concomitant AEDs was 14.4% (205 patients), while 5.5% (79 patients) were treated with LEV only at the end of follow-up. Accidental injury (28.0%), infection (26.6%), headache (25.8%), somnolence (23%), asthenia (22.6%), and dizziness (18.9%) were among the most common adverse events. CONCLUSION: LEV offers sustained efficacy in patients with refractory partial seizures, and its long-term tolerability is similar to that seen in the short-term placebo-controlled trials.     

Pregabalin for the management of partial epilepsy

Pregabalin is one of the latest antiepileptic drugs introduced for the treatment of partial epilepsy. Its efficacy and safety as adjunctive therapy in refractory partial epilepsy have been established in four double-blind placebo-controlled trials (n = 1396) and 4 long-term open-label studies (n = 1480). In 3 fixed-dose trials, the proportion of patients with a ≥50% reduction in seizure frequency across the effective dose-range (150–600 mg/day) ranged between 14% and 51%, with a clear dose-response relationship. Suppression of seizure activity could be demonstrated as early as day 2. The most frequently reported CNS-related adverse events included dizziness, somnolence, ataxia and fatigue, were usually mild or moderate, and tended to be dose related. In long-term studies, weight gain was reported as an adverse event by 24% of patients. When pregabalin dose was individualized to according to response within the 150 to 600 mg/day dose range, tolerability was considerably improved compared with use of a high-dose, fixed-dose regimen (600 mg/day) without titration. In long-term studies up to 4 years, no evidence of loss efficacy was identified. During the last year on pregabalin, 3.7% of patients were seizure-free. Pregabalin appears to be a useful addition to the therapeutic armamentariun for the management of refractory partial epilepsy.     

Clinical predictors in patients with refractory epilepsy exposed to levetiracetam: a single-center study

Objectives –  This aim of the study was to ascertain the importance of clinical parameters on the response to treatment in refractory epilepsy patients on levetiracetam (LEV).
Materials and methods –  We retrospectively evaluated medical records of 132 patients aged 17–78 years with refractory epilepsy (defined as a failure of at least two antiepileptic drugs due to the lack of efficacy) exposed to LEV. We analyzed the response (seizure freedom or continuing LEV) using logistic regression.
Results –  Of 132 patients exposed to LEV, 103 cases continued the drug. Of the discontinuations (29/132), 75% were for lack of efficacy and 25% for tolerability problems. Twenty-three percent of the previously refractory patients achieved seizure freedom for at least 1 year with LEV in combination therapy. The dose of LEV in 80% of seizure-free patients was 1000 mg/day or less. The duration of epilepsy, age and sex were not associated with response to LEV. Seizure freedom was associated with epileptic syndrome or etiology. If no specific syndrome was recognized, there was a significantly greater chance for response compared with temporal lobe epilepsy (OR 20.76; 95% CI 2.12–203.61).
Conclusions –  Our study was based on the careful clinical evaluation of the patients with extensive use of video EEG (50%) and MRI scans (95%). These clinical predictors were evasive in previous studies. This study showed that they are worth pursuing but significantly larger groups of patients need to be investigated to reach significant findings.     

Review of Controlled Trials of Gabitril (Tiagabine): A Clinician's Viewpoint

Summary: A recent problem for doctors has been the choice of which new antiepileptic drug (AED) to select for treatment of pharmacoresistant epilepsy. This article summarizes the clinical experience to date regarding the efficacy and safety of tiagabine (TGB; Gabitril) as adjunctive therapy in patients with partial-onset seizures. In its early Phase II development, TGB was evaluated in two multicenter pilot studies. Each had an open-label enrichment phase followed by a treatment phase with randomized, double-blind, two-period, cross-over phases. Between 24 and 50% of patients experienced reductions in seizure rates of ≥50%, depending on the type of partial seizure. In Phase III, three double-blind, parallel group, placebo-controlled adjunctive studies determined the efficacy of TGB in patients with refractory partial seizures. The first was a dose-response study employing doses of TGB-HCl of 16, 32 or 56 mg/day. Significant reductions in seizure rates were found with 32 and 56 mg/day. The second and third studies evaluated the efficacy of dosing TGB twice, three times, and four times daily, all of which showed similar efficacy. TGB efficacy in partial seizures was supported in several open trials, and no tolerance to efficacy was noted in long-term continuation studies. Tolerability was documented in all trials. Most adverse events were mild or moderate and transient, occurring during dose titration. They were clearly dose-related. No relevant changes in hematologic and biochemical tests, vital signs, or body weight were attributable to TGB. TGB appears to be an effective new drug for partial seizures with an acceptable safety profile.     

Levetiracetam in refractory epilepsy: a prospective observational study.

This prospective open-label study used flexible dosing schedules of levetiracetam (LEV) in patients with refractory epilepsy attending a single centre to explore its effectiveness in everyday clinical practice. One hundred and fifty-six patients with uncontrolled localisation-related or idiopathic-generalised epilepsy were prescribed adjunctive LEV following a 3-month baseline. The primary end points were seizure freedom for at least 6 months, > or = 50% reduction (responder) or <50% reduction for 6 months, or discontinuation of LEV due to lack of efficacy, adverse effects or both. Overall, 40 (26%) patients became seizure free on adjunctive LEV, including 8 (40%) with idiopathic-generalised epilepsy. Twenty-five (63%) of the seizure-free patients took 1000 mg LEV per day or less. A further 33 (21%) patients were classified as responders. LEV was withdrawn in 46 (29%) patients (27 adverse effects, 8 lack of efficacy, 11 both). Intolerable sedation, reported by 20 (13%) patients, was the commonest complaint leading to treatment failure. Behavioural side effects led to LEV withdrawal in 7 (5%) patients. LEV is an effective adjunctive treatment for refractory idiopathic and localisation-related epilepsies. Many patients who responded optimally to LEV did so at 1000 mg per day or less.     

Levetiracetam in clinical practice: long-term experience in patients with refractory epilepsy referred to a tertiary epilepsy center

OBJECTIVE: For the treatment of patients with chronic refractory epilepsies, development of new antiepileptic drugs is crucial. Three regulatory trials have demonstrated that add-on levetiracetam is efficacious in patients with localization-related epilepsy. However, results from these highly controlled short-term clinical trials cannot simply be extrapolated to everyday clinical practice. Therefore, more information is needed about the long-term profile of a new antiepileptic drug in clinical practice. METHOD: We analyzed all patients who had been treated with levetiracetam in the Epilepsy Centre Kempenhaeghe from the introduction of the drug in early 2001 up to a final assessment point, at the end of 2003, using a medical information system. RESULTS: In total, 301 patients were included. One hundred thirty-eight patients (45.8%) discontinued LEV treatment during the 24-month follow-up period. Reasons for discontinuation were lack of efficacy in 15.9% of patients, adverse events in 6.0% of patients, and a combination of lack of efficacy and adverse events in 16.3% of patients. By Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, the continuation rate was 65.6% after 1 year and 45.8% after 2 years. About 15% of patients in this highly refractory group had a 3-month remission, whereas 10% of patients became seizure-free for longer periods. The most frequently reported side effects at the time of discontinuation were mood disorders, tiredness, and sleepiness. Variables predicting (dis)continuation of levetiracetam treatment could not be identified. CONCLUSION: Levetiracetam is a new antiepileptic drug that appears to be a useful add-on treatment in patients with refractory epilepsy. Its side effect profile is mild, with mood disorders being the most dominant adverse event.     

Long-term results of vagus nerve stimulation in refractory epilepsy.

Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is an adjunctive antiepileptic treatment for patients with refractory epilepsy. Limited information on long-term treatment with VNS is available. The purpose of this paper is to present our experience with VNS with a follow-up of up to 4 years. Twenty-five patients (13 females and 12 males) with refractory partial epilepsy were treated with VNS. The first 15 patients with a mean age of 30 years and a mean duration of epilepsy of 17.5 years have sufficient follow-up for analysis. Mean post-implantation follow-up was 29 months and mean stimulation output 2.25 mA. There was a mean seizure frequency reduction from 14 complex partial seizures (CPS) per month before implantation to 8 CPS per month after implantation (P = 0.0016; Wilcoxon signed-rank rest (WSRT)). The mean maximum CPS-free interval changed from 9 to 312 days (P = 0.0007; WSRT). Six patients were free of CPS for at least one year. In one patient, one antiepileptic drug (AED) was tapered; in 10 patients, AEDs remained unchanged; in four, one adjunctive AED was administered. Side effects occurred in six patients, three of whom required a temporary reduction of output current. Nine patients reported no side effects at all. Treatment with VNS remains effective in the long-term. In this series 4 / 15 (27%) patients with highly refractory epilepsy experienced entirely seizure-free intervals of 12 months or more.     

Assessment of a dose–response relationship of levetiracetam

The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between levetiracetam dose and both efficacy and safety in adult patients with refractory partial epilepsy. Dose–response relationships for levetiracetam efficacy were evaluated using pooled data from three trials including adults with refractory partial epilepsy. Two were randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trials in which doses of 1000–3000 mg/day of levetiracetam were administered as adjunctive therapy. The third consisted of the two parts of a crossover randomized, double-blind study in which levetiracetam (1000 or 2000 mg/day) or placebo was added to ongoing therapy. Data from each part of the crossover trial were included as if it was an independent parallel-group study. A fourth randomized double-blind trial was added for the safety evaluation. It included data from adults receiving placebo or 2000 mg/day of levetiracetam as adjunctive therapy for refractory partial seizures. The combined analysis showed an increasing effect with increasing dose. The responder rates (≥50% reduction in seizures) for placebo and levetiracetam 1000, 2000, and 3000 mg/day were 13.1%, 28.5%, 34.3%, and 41.3%, respectively. The respective values for seizure freedom were 0.8%, 4.7%, 6.3%, and 8.6%. There was no evidence of a dose–response relationship with regard to adverse events, including those (asthenia, dizziness, somnolence) most commonly associated with this antiepileptic drug. Patients who do not become seizure-free at the lowest recommended levetiracetam dose (1000 mg/day) should be titrated to 2000 or 3000 mg/day to provide the greatest opportunity for efficacy with little or no increased risk for adverse events.     

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.     

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.     

左乙拉西坦添加治疗难治性癫癎的疗效和安全性分析

目的:探讨左乙拉西坦添加治疗难治性癫痫的疗效和安全性。方法:回顾性分析了35例左乙拉西坦添加治疗的难治性癫痫患者,随访3～18个月,观察其疗效及不良反应。结果:左乙拉西坦添加治疗难治性癫痫总有效率为48.6%,对部分性发作和全面性发作的疗效无显著差异。不良反应发生率为31.5%,无严重不良反应。结论:左乙拉西坦是一种安全有效的难治性癫痫治疗药物,可以用于难治性癫痫的添加治疗。     

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.     

Long-Term Experience with Topiramate as Adjunctive Therapy and as Monotherapy in Patients with Partial Onset Seizures: Retrospective Survey of Open-Label Treatment

Summary: Because initial studies of new antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are add-on trials in refractory patient populations, their effectiveness as monotherapy is usually not apparent until relatively later in their development programs. The novel AED topiramate (TPM) has been found efficacious as adjunctive therapy in controlled, randomized trials in adults with partial onset seizures. We report a retrospective analysis of TPM as AED monotherapy in 214 patients from five centers who received TPM in investigational trials. Of this total, 136 (64%) were still receiving TPM at the time of the analysis, with a mean treatment duration of 2.5 years. One-third of the patients have been successfully converted to TPM monotherapy, and 62% of those converted have been seizure-free for at least 3 months. The results of this analysis suggest that TPM may prove to be a valuable new AED for both monotherapy and add-on therapy in partial onset epilepsy.     

Vigabatrin as add-on therapy for adult complex partial seizures: a double-blind, placebo-controlled multicentre study. The Canadian Vigabatrin Study Group.

Vigabatrin (VGB) is a novel antiepileptic drug effective as adjunctive therapy in patients with partial seizures. In this study, the efficacy and tolerability of VGB as adjunctive therapy were evaluated in patients with refractory epilepsy. Adult patients with a definite diagnosis of complex partial seizures and/or partial seizures secondarily generalized were recruited from 10 Canadian centres. Patients were randomized to receive either active medication or placebo in a double- blind fashion and entered a 36-week titration and maintenance phase with regularly scheduled visits. Both efficacy parameters and safety assessments were monitored. Clinical laboratory, evoked potential studies, MRI, and neuropsychological tests were also performed. Forty-eight percent of VGB-treated patients vs. 26 percent of placebo-treated patients had a 50 percent or greater reduction in the frequency of complex partial seizures and partial seizures secondarily generalized. Vigabatrin was well tolerated by the majority of patients. Minor neurological side effects were observed in a number of patients in both treatment groups. No serious systemic toxicity was observed. No changes in evoked potential studies or MRI findings were noted. Vigabatrin was found to be an effective and well-tolerated antiepileptic drug when used as adjunctive therapy in patients with difficult to control complex partial seizures and for partial seizures secondarily generalized. Vigabatrin is a selective irreversible inhibitor of the GABA- degradating enzyme GABA transaminase and has shown efficacy in a number of clinical trials in patients with difficult to control partial seizures. Vigabatrin has been found most effective against complex partial and secondarily generalized tonic-clonic seizures in both adults and children. Vigabatrin has also been shown to reduce infantile spasms secondary to various aetiologies and is most effective in spasms associated with tuberous sclerosis. The aim of this study was to further extend the clinical experience with VGB as adjunctive therapy in the treatment of adult patients with difficult to control complex partial seizures and/or partial seizures secondarily generalized. In addition to the assessments of efficacy and tolerability to VGB, neuropsychological evaluations were also carried out.