-
Neuropsychopharmacology Reports Sep 2021Antiseizure drugs (ASDs) are the primary therapy for epilepsy, with more than 20 drugs introduced into clinical practice to date. These drugs are typically grouped by... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Antiseizure drugs (ASDs) are the primary therapy for epilepsy, with more than 20 drugs introduced into clinical practice to date. These drugs are typically grouped by their mechanisms of action and therapeutic spectrum. This article aims to educate non-neurologists and medical students about the new frontiers in the pharmacology of ASDs and presents the current state of the literature on the efficacy and tolerability of these agents.
METHODS
Randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and evidence-based meta-analyses of ASD efficacy and tolerability as initial monotherapy for epileptic seizures and syndromes were identified in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Elsevier Clinical Pharmacology.
RESULTS
The choice of ASD varies primarily according to the seizure type. Practical guidelines for ASD selection in patients with new-onset and drug-resistant epilepsy were recently published. The guidelines have shown that the newer-generation drugs, which have unique mechanistic and pharmacokinetic properties, are better tolerated but have similar efficacy compared with the older drugs. Several ASDs are effective as first-line monotherapy in focal seizures, including lamotrigine, carbamazepine, phenytoin, levetiracetam, and zonisamide. Valproate remains the first-line drug for many patients with generalized and unclassified epilepsies. However, valproate should be avoided, if possible, in women of childbearing potential because of teratogenicity. Toxicity profile precludes several drugs from use as first-line treatment, for example, vigabatrin, felbamate, and rufinamide.
CONCLUSIONS
Antiseizure drugs have different pharmacologic profiles that should be considered when selecting and prescribing these agents for epilepsy. These include pharmacokinetic properties, propensity for drug-drug interactions, and adverse effects.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Epilepsies, Partial; Epilepsy; Epilepsy, Generalized; Humans; Neuropharmacology; Pharmaceutical Preparations; Seizures; Valproic Acid
PubMed: 34296824
DOI: 10.1002/npr2.12196 -
Neurogastroenterology and Motility Jun 2019The increasing recognition of cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS) in adults prompted the development of these evidence-based guidelines on the management of CVS in adults,... (Review)
Review
The increasing recognition of cyclic vomiting syndrome (CVS) in adults prompted the development of these evidence-based guidelines on the management of CVS in adults, which was sponsored by the American Neurogastroenterology and Motility Society (ANMS) and the Cyclic Vomiting Syndrome Association (CVSA). GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) framework was used and a professional librarian performed the literature search. The expert committee included the President of the CVSA who brought a patient perspective into the deliberations. The committee makes recommendations for the prophylaxis of CVS, treatment of acute attacks, diagnosis, and overall management of CVS. The committee strongly recommends that adults with moderate-to-severe CVS receive a tricyclic antidepressant (TCA), such as amitriptyline, as a first-line prophylactic medication and receive topiramate or aprepitant as alternate prophylactic medications. Zonisamide or levetiracetam and mitochondrial supplements (Coenzyme Q10, L-carnitine, and riboflavin) are conditionally recommended as alternate prophylactic medications, either alone or concurrently with other prophylactic medications. For acute attacks, the committee conditionally recommends using serotonin antagonists, such as ondansetron, and/or triptans, such as sumatriptan or aprepitant to abort symptoms. Emergency department treatment is best achieved with the use of an individualized treatment protocol and shared with the care team (example provided). The committee recommended screening and treatment for comorbid conditions such as anxiety, depression, migraine headache, autonomic dysfunction, sleep disorders, and substance use with referral to appropriate allied health services as indicated. Techniques like meditation, relaxation, and biofeedback may be offered as complementary therapy to improve overall well-being and patient care outcomes.
Topics: Adult; Antiemetics; Consensus; Gastroenterology; Humans; Societies, Medical; Treatment Outcome; United States; Vomiting
PubMed: 31241819
DOI: 10.1111/nmo.13604 -
CNS Drugs Oct 2022The developmental and epileptic encephalopathies encompass a group of rare syndromes characterised by severe drug-resistant epilepsy with onset in childhood and... (Review)
Review
The developmental and epileptic encephalopathies encompass a group of rare syndromes characterised by severe drug-resistant epilepsy with onset in childhood and significant neurodevelopmental comorbidities. The latter include intellectual disability, developmental delay, behavioural problems including attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder, psychiatric problems including anxiety and depression, speech impairment and sleep problems. Classical examples of developmental and epileptic encephalopathies include Dravet syndrome, Lennox-Gastaut syndrome and tuberous sclerosis complex. The mainstay of treatment is with multiple anti-seizure medications (ASMs); however, the ASMs themselves can be associated with psychobehavioural adverse events, and effects (negative or positive) on cognition and sleep. We have performed a targeted literature review of ASMs commonly used in the treatment of developmental and epileptic encephalopathies to discuss the latest evidence on their effects on behaviour, mood, cognition, sedation and sleep. The ASMs include valproate (VPA), clobazam, topiramate (TPM), cannabidiol (CBD), fenfluramine (FFA), levetiracetam (LEV), brivaracetam (BRV), zonisamide (ZNS), perampanel (PER), ethosuximide, stiripentol, lamotrigine (LTG), rufinamide, vigabatrin, lacosamide (LCM) and everolimus. Bromide, felbamate and other sodium channel ASMs are discussed briefly. Overall, the current evidence suggest that LEV, PER and to a lesser extent BRV are associated with psychobehavioural adverse events including aggressiveness and irritability; TPM and to a lesser extent ZNS are associated with language impairment and cognitive dulling/memory problems. Patients with a history of behavioural and psychiatric comorbidities may be more at risk of developing psychobehavioural adverse events. Topiramate and ZNS may be associated with negative effects in some aspects of cognition; CBD, FFA, LEV, BRV and LTG may have some positive effects, while the remaining ASMs do not appear to have a detrimental effect. All the ASMs are associated with sedation to a certain extent, which is pronounced during uptitration. Cannabidiol, PER and pregabalin may be associated with improvements in sleep, LTG is associated with insomnia, while VPA, TPM, LEV, ZNS and LCM do not appear to have detrimental effects. There was variability in the extent of evidence for each ASM: for many first-generation and some second-generation ASMs, there is scant documented evidence; however, their extensive use suggests favourable tolerability and safety (e.g. VPA); second-generation and some third-generation ASMs tend to have the most robust evidence documented over several years of use (TPM, LEV, PER, ZNS, BRV), while evidence is still being generated for newer ASMs such as CBD and FFA. Finally, we discuss how a variety of factors can affect mood, behaviour and cognition, and untangling the associations between the effects of the underlying syndrome and those of the ASMs can be challenging. In particular, there is enormous heterogeneity in cognitive, behavioural and developmental impairments that is complex and can change naturally over time; there is a lack of standardised instruments for evaluating these outcomes in developmental and epileptic encephalopathies, with a reliance on subjective evaluations by proxy (caregivers); and treatment regimes are complex involving multiple ASMs as well as other drugs.
Topics: Autism Spectrum Disorder; Bromides; Cannabidiol; Clobazam; Cognition; Ethosuximide; Everolimus; Felbamate; Fenfluramine; Humans; Lacosamide; Lamotrigine; Levetiracetam; Pregabalin; Spasms, Infantile; Sulfides; Topiramate; Valproic Acid; Vigabatrin; Zinc Compounds; Zonisamide
PubMed: 36194365
DOI: 10.1007/s40263-022-00955-9 -
Children (Basel, Switzerland) Dec 2022Obesity might adversely affect the health and well-being of children and their families. Childhood obesity has crucial implications for health, both during childhood and... (Review)
Review
Obesity might adversely affect the health and well-being of children and their families. Childhood obesity has crucial implications for health, both during childhood and as they age. It is highly associated with many acute problems and is commonly present during childhood, making visits and hospital admissions polarized in this group of children. The problems that may affect these children can be medical, such as asthma, chronic inflammation, orthopedic abnormalities, liver disease, diabetes mellitus or dyslipidemia. Long-term consequences of cardiovascular risk factors, the persistence of obesity and premature mortality are common among adults who had obesity during their early lives. Additionally, they could also suffer from psychological issues, such as low self-esteem, which puts them at risk of a much more serious psychosocial problem that may lead to depression, as well as a disruption in educational achievements and social relationships. A healthy diet, physical activity, adequate sleep, and limited screen time are all preventive measures that should be implemented at the family and community levels, preferably through well-structured programs. Furthermore, pharmacological management of childhood obesity is limited and only used after non-pharmacological interventions have failed or in the late stages of obesity. However, recent guidelines advocate the early use of medical interventions. Approved pharmacotherapeutic options include orlistat, phentermine/topiramate combination and liraglutide. There are several other options approved primarily for other specific forms of obesity or for other indications, including setmelanotide, metformin, lisdexamfetamine, zonisamide and fluoxetine. Bariatric surgery is a safe and effective option in cases with extreme obesity and comorbidities considering the need for long-term monitoring and support for cases and their families post-surgery. This review aims to discuss and highlight the recent evidence regarding risk factors, clinical consequences, prevention, and treatment of childhood obesity.
PubMed: 36553418
DOI: 10.3390/children9121975 -
Antiepileptic drug monotherapy for epilepsy: a network meta-analysis of individual participant data.The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2022This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in 2017. Epilepsy is a common neurological condition with a worldwide prevalence of around 1%.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This is an updated version of the original Cochrane Review published in 2017. Epilepsy is a common neurological condition with a worldwide prevalence of around 1%. Approximately 60% to 70% of people with epilepsy will achieve a longer-term remission from seizures, and most achieve that remission shortly after starting antiepileptic drug treatment. Most people with epilepsy are treated with a single antiepileptic drug (monotherapy) and current guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom for adults and children recommend carbamazepine or lamotrigine as first-line treatment for focal onset seizures and sodium valproate for generalised onset seizures; however, a range of other antiepileptic drug (AED) treatments are available, and evidence is needed regarding their comparative effectiveness in order to inform treatment choices.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the time to treatment failure, remission and first seizure of 12 AEDs (carbamazepine, phenytoin, sodium valproate, phenobarbitone, oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, gabapentin, topiramate, eventrate, zonisamide, eslicarbazepine acetate, lacosamide) currently used as monotherapy in children and adults with focal onset seizures (simple focal, complex focal or secondary generalised) or generalised tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalised seizure types (absence, myoclonus).
SEARCH METHODS
For the latest update, we searched the following databases on 12 April 2021: the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web), which includes PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Epilepsy Group Specialised Register and MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to April 09, 2021). We handsearched relevant journals and contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators and experts in the field.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials of a monotherapy design in adults or children with focal onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
This was an individual participant data (IPD) and network meta-analysis (NMA) review. Our primary outcome was 'time to treatment failure', and our secondary outcomes were 'time to achieve 12-month remission', 'time to achieve six-month remission', and 'time to first seizure post-randomisation'. We performed frequentist NMA to combine direct evidence with indirect evidence across the treatment network of 12 drugs. We investigated inconsistency between direct 'pairwise' estimates and NMA results via node splitting. Results are presented as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and we assessed the certainty of the evidence using the CiNeMA approach, based on the GRADE framework. We have also provided a narrative summary of the most commonly reported adverse events.
MAIN RESULTS
IPD were provided for at least one outcome of this review for 14,789 out of a total of 22,049 eligible participants (67% of total data) from 39 out of the 89 eligible trials (43% of total trials). We could not include IPD from the remaining 50 trials in analysis for a variety of reasons, such as being unable to contact an author or sponsor to request data, data being lost or no longer available, cost and resources required to prepare data being prohibitive, or local authority or country-specific restrictions. No IPD were available from a single trial of eslicarbazepine acetate, so this AED could not be included in the NMA. Network meta-analysis showed high-certainty evidence that for our primary outcome, 'time to treatment failure', for individuals with focal seizures; lamotrigine performs better than most other treatments in terms of treatment failure for any reason and due to adverse events, including the other first-line treatment carbamazepine; HRs (95% CIs) for treatment failure for any reason for lamotrigine versus: eventrate 1.01 (0.88 to 1.20), zonisamide 1.18 (0.96 to 1.44), lacosamide 1.19 (0.90 to 1.58), carbamazepine 1.26 (1.10 to 1.44), oxcarbazepine 1.30 (1.02 to 1.66), sodium valproate 1.35 (1.09 to 1.69), phenytoin 1.44 (1.11 to 1.85), topiramate 1.50 (1.23 to 1.81), gabapentin 1.53 (1.26 to 1.85), phenobarbitone 1.97 (1.45 to 2.67). No significant difference between lamotrigine and eventrate was shown for any treatment failure outcome, and both AEDs seemed to perform better than all other AEDs. For people with generalised onset seizures, evidence was more limited and of moderate certainty; no other treatment performed better than first-line treatment sodium valproate, but there were no differences between sodium valproate, lamotrigine or eventrate in terms of treatment failure; HRs (95% CIs) for treatment failure for any reason for sodium valproate versus: lamotrigine 1.06 (0.81 to 1.37), eventrate 1.13 (0.89 to 1.42), gabapentin 1.13 (0.61 to 2.11), phenytoin 1.17 (0.80 to 1.73), oxcarbazepine 1.24 (0.72 to 2.14), topiramate 1.37 (1.06 to 1.77), carbamazepine 1.52 (1.18 to 1.96), phenobarbitone 2.13 (1.20 to 3.79), lacosamide 2.64 (1.14 to 6.09). Network meta-analysis also showed high-certainty evidence that for secondary remission outcomes, few notable differences were shown for either seizure type; for individuals with focal seizures, carbamazepine performed better than gabapentin (12-month remission) and sodium valproate (six-month remission). No differences between lamotrigine and any AED were shown for individuals with focal seizures, or between sodium valproate and other AEDs for individuals with generalised onset seizures. Network meta-analysis also showed high- to moderate-certainty evidence that, for 'time to first seizure,' in general, the earliest licensed treatments (phenytoin and phenobarbitone) performed better than the other treatments for individuals with focal seizures; phenobarbitone performed better than both first-line treatments carbamazepine and lamotrigine. There were no notable differences between the newer drugs (oxcarbazepine, topiramate, gabapentin, eventrate, zonisamide and lacosamide) for either seizure type. Generally, direct evidence (where available) and network meta-analysis estimates were numerically similar and consistent with confidence intervals of effect sizes overlapping. There was no important indication of inconsistency between direct and network meta-analysis results. The most commonly reported adverse events across all drugs were drowsiness/fatigue, headache or migraine, gastrointestinal disturbances, dizziness/faintness and rash or skin disorders; however, reporting of adverse events was highly variable across AEDs and across studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
High-certainty evidence demonstrates that for people with focal onset seizures, current first-line treatment options carbamazepine and lamotrigine, as well as newer drug eventrate, show the best profile in terms of treatment failure and seizure control as first-line treatments. For people with generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other seizure types), current first-line treatment sodium valproate has the best profile compared to all other treatments, but lamotrigine and eventrate would be the most suitable alternative first-line treatments, particularly for those for whom sodium valproate may not be an appropriate treatment option. Further evidence from randomised controlled trials recruiting individuals with generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other seizure types) is needed.
Topics: Adult; Anticonvulsants; Child; Epilepsies, Partial; Epilepsy; Humans; Network Meta-Analysis; Phenytoin
PubMed: 35363878
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011412.pub4 -
Developmental Medicine and Child... Nov 2010Doose syndrome, otherwise traditionally known as myoclonic-astatic epilepsy, was first described as a unique epilepsy syndrome by Dr Hermann Doose in 1970. In 1989, the... (Review)
Review
Doose syndrome, otherwise traditionally known as myoclonic-astatic epilepsy, was first described as a unique epilepsy syndrome by Dr Hermann Doose in 1970. In 1989, the International League Against Epilepsy classified it formally as a symptomatic generalized epilepsy, and 20 years later it was renamed 'epilepsy with myoclonic-atonic seizures'. In this review, we discuss the components of this unique disorder including its incidence, clinical features, and electroencephalographic findings. Recent evidence has suggested possible genetic links to the GEFS+ (generalized epilepsy with febrile seizures plus) family, and, additionally, some children with structural brain lesions can mimic the Doose syndrome phenotype. Treatment strategies such as corticosteroids, ethosuximide, and valproate have been described as only partially effective, but newer anticonvulsants, such as levetiracetam and zonisamide, may provide additional seizure control. The most effective treatment reported to date appears to be the ketogenic diet. Prognosis is quite varied in this disorder; however, many children can have a remarkably normal neurodevelopmental outcome.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Electroencephalography; Epilepsies, Myoclonic; History, 20th Century; History, 21st Century; Humans; Mutation; NAV1.9 Voltage-Gated Sodium Channel; Neuropeptides; Prognosis; Receptors, GABA-A; Sodium Channels
PubMed: 20722665
DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.2010.03744.x -
Drugs & Aging Apr 2019Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) is a complex disease that involves a variety of cognitive, behavioral and neurological symptoms, including progressive memory loss,... (Review)
Review
Dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) is a complex disease that involves a variety of cognitive, behavioral and neurological symptoms, including progressive memory loss, visual hallucinations, parkinsonism, cognitive fluctuations and rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder (RBD). These symptoms may appear in varying combinations and levels of severity in each patient who is seen in the clinic, making diagnosis and treatment a challenge. DLB is the third most common of all the neurodegenerative diseases behind both Alzheimer's disease and Parkinson's disease (PD). The median age of onset for DLB (76.3 years) is younger than that seen in PD dementia (81.4 years). New pathological studies have shown that most DLB patients have variable amounts of Alzheimer's changes in their brains, explaining the wide variability in this disease's clinical presentation and clinical course. This review discusses the three cholinesterase inhibitors that have been shown to be effective in managing the cognitive and behavioral symptoms of DLB: rivastigmine, galantamine and donepezil. Memantine is able to improve clinical global impression of change in those with mild to moderate DLB. Levodopa can treat the parkinsonism of some DLB patients, but the dose is often limited due to the fact that it can cause agitation or worsening of visual hallucinations. A recent phase 2 clinical trial showed the benefit of zonisamide when it is added as an adjunct to levodopa for treating DLB parkinsonism. While atypical antipsychotic drugs may not always be helpful as monotherapy in managing the agitation associated with DLB, low doses of valproic acid can be effective when added as an adjunct to drugs like quetiapine. Pimavanserin may prove to be a useful treatment for psychosis in DLB patients, but like other antipsychotic drugs that are used in dementia patients, there is a small increased risk of mortality. RBD, which is a common core clinical feature of DLB, can be managed with either melatonin or clonazepam. Two agents targeting alpha-synuclein (NPT200-11 and ambroxol) currently hold promise as disease-modifying therapies for DLB, but they are yet to be tested in clinical trials. An agent (E2027) that offers hope of neuroprotection by increasing central cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP) levels is currently being examined in clinical trials in DLB patients.
Topics: Age Factors; Aged; Anticonvulsants; Antiparkinson Agents; Cholinesterase Inhibitors; Clinical Trials, Phase II as Topic; Clonazepam; Humans; Levodopa; Lewy Body Disease; Melatonin; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Zonisamide
PubMed: 30680679
DOI: 10.1007/s40266-018-00636-7 -
Drugs in R&D Dec 2016Given the distinctive characteristics of both epilepsy and antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) can make a significant contribution to the field... (Review)
Review
Given the distinctive characteristics of both epilepsy and antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) can make a significant contribution to the field of epilepsy. The measurement and interpretation of serum drug concentrations can be of benefit in the treatment of uncontrollable seizures and in cases of clinical toxicity; it can aid in the individualization of therapy and in adjusting for variable or nonlinear pharmacokinetics; and can be useful in special populations such as pregnancy. This review examines the potential for TDM of newer AEDs such as eslicarbazepine acetate, felbamate, gabapentin, lacosamide, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, perampanel, pregabalin, rufinamide, retigabine, stiripentol, tiagabine, topiramate, vigabatrin, and zonisamide. We describe the relationships between serum drug concentration, clinical effect, and adverse drug reactions for each AED as well as the different analytical methods used for serum drug quantification. We discuss retrospective studies and prospective data on the serum drug concentration-efficacy of these drugs and present the pharmacokinetic parameters, oral bioavailability, reference concentration range, and active metabolites of newer AEDs. Limited data are available for recent AEDs, and we discuss the connection between drug concentrations in terms of clinical efficacy and nonresponse. Although we do not propose routine TDM, serum drug measurement can play a beneficial role in patient management and treatment individualization. Standardized studies designed to assess, in particular, concentration-efficacy-toxicity relationships for recent AEDs are urgently required.
Topics: Anticonvulsants; Drug Monitoring; Epilepsy; Humans
PubMed: 27766590
DOI: 10.1007/s40268-016-0148-6 -
Lancet (London, England) Apr 2021Levetiracetam and zonisamide are licensed as monotherapy for patients with focal epilepsy, but there is uncertainty as to whether they should be recommended as... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
The SANAD II study of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam, zonisamide, or lamotrigine for newly diagnosed focal epilepsy: an open-label, non-inferiority, multicentre, phase 4, randomised controlled trial.
BACKGROUND
Levetiracetam and zonisamide are licensed as monotherapy for patients with focal epilepsy, but there is uncertainty as to whether they should be recommended as first-line treatments because of insufficient evidence of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. We aimed to assess the long-term clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of levetiracetam and zonisamide compared with lamotrigine in people with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy.
METHODS
This randomised, open-label, controlled trial compared levetiracetam and zonisamide with lamotrigine as first-line treatment for patients with newly diagnosed focal epilepsy. Adult and paediatric neurology services across the UK recruited participants aged 5 years or older (with no upper age limit) with two or more unprovoked focal seizures. Participants were randomly allocated (1:1:1) using a minimisation programme with a random element utilising factor to receive lamotrigine, levetiracetam, or zonisamide. Participants and investigators were not masked and were aware of treatment allocation. SANAD II was designed to assess non-inferiority of both levetiracetam and zonisamide to lamotrigine for the primary outcome of time to 12-month remission. Anti-seizure medications were taken orally and for participants aged 12 years or older the initial advised maintenance doses were lamotrigine 50 mg (morning) and 100 mg (evening), levetiracetam 500 mg twice per day, and zonisamide 100 mg twice per day. For children aged between 5 and 12 years the initial daily maintenance doses advised were lamotrigine 1·5 mg/kg twice per day, levetiracetam 20 mg/kg twice per day, and zonisamide 2·5 mg/kg twice per day. All participants were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. The per-protocol (PP) analysis excluded participants with major protocol deviations and those who were subsequently diagnosed as not having epilepsy. Safety analysis included all participants who received one dose of any study drug. The non-inferiority limit was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·329, which equates to an absolute difference of 10%. A HR greater than 1 indicated that an event was more likely on lamotrigine. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, 30294119 (EudraCt number: 2012-001884-64).
FINDINGS
990 participants were recruited between May 2, 2013, and June 20, 2017, and followed up for a further 2 years. Patients were randomly assigned to receive lamotrigine (n=330), levetiracetam (n=332), or zonisamide (n=328). The ITT analysis included all participants and the PP analysis included 324 participants randomly assigned to lamotrigine, 320 participants randomly assigned to levetiracetam, and 315 participants randomly assigned to zonisamide. Levetiracetam did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the ITT analysis of time to 12-month remission versus lamotrigine (HR 1·18; 97·5% CI 0·95-1·47) but zonisamide did meet the criteria for non-inferiority in the ITT analysis versus lamotrigine (1·03; 0·83-1·28). The PP analysis showed that 12-month remission was superior with lamotrigine than both levetiracetam (HR 1·32 [97·5% CI 1·05 to 1·66]) and zonisamide (HR 1·37 [1·08-1·73]). There were 37 deaths during the trial. Adverse reactions were reported by 108 (33%) participants who started lamotrigine, 144 (44%) participants who started levetiracetam, and 146 (45%) participants who started zonisamide. Lamotrigine was superior in the cost-utility analysis, with a higher net health benefit of 1·403 QALYs (97·5% central range 1·319-1·458) compared with 1·222 (1·110-1·283) for levetiracetam and 1·232 (1·112, 1·307) for zonisamide at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20 000 per QALY. Cost-effectiveness was based on differences between treatment groups in costs and QALYs.
INTERPRETATION
These findings do not support the use of levetiracetam or zonisamide as first-line treatments for patients with focal epilepsy. Lamotrigine should remain a first-line treatment for patients with focal epilepsy and should be the standard treatment in future trials.
FUNDING
National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Anticonvulsants; Child; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Epilepsies, Partial; Female; Humans; Lamotrigine; Levetiracetam; Male; Middle Aged; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult; Zonisamide
PubMed: 33838757
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00247-6