Richard Appleton

The SANAD study of effectiveness of carbamazepine, gabapentin, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, or topiramate for treatment of partial epilepsy: an unblinded randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Carbamazepine is widely accepted as a drug of first choice for patients with partial onset seizures. Several newer drugs possess efficacy against these seizure types but previous randomised controlled trials have failed to inform a choice between these drugs. We aimed to assess efficacy with regards to longer-term outcomes, quality of life, and health economic outcomes. METHODS SANAD was an unblinded randomised controlled trial in hospital-based outpatient clinics in the UK. Arm A recruited 1721 patients for whom carbamazepine was deemed to be standard treatment, and they were randomly assigned to receive carbamazepine, gabapentin, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, or topiramate. Primary outcomes were time to treatment failure, and time to 12-months remission, and assessment was by both intention to treat and per protocol. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN38354748. FINDINGS For time to treatment failure, lamotrigine was significantly better than carbamazepine (hazard ratio [HR] 0.78 [95% CI 0.63-0.97]), gabapentin (0.65 [0.52-0.80]), and topiramate (0.64 [0.52-0.79]), and had a non-significant advantage compared with oxcarbazepine (1.15 [0.86-1.54]). For time to 12-month remission carbamazepine was significantly better than gabapentin (0.75 [0.63-0.90]), and estimates suggest a non-significant advantage for carbamazepine against lamotrigine (0.91 [0.77-1.09]), topiramate (0.86 [0.72-1.03]), and oxcarbazepine (0.92 [0.73-1.18]). In a per-protocol analysis, at 2 and 4 years the difference (95% CI) in the proportion achieving a 12-month remission (lamotrigine-carbamazepine) is 0 (-8 to 7) and 5 (-3 to 12), suggesting non-inferiority of lamotrigine compared with carbamazepine. INTERPRETATION Lamotrigine is clinically better than carbamazepine, the standard drug treatment, for time to treatment failure outcomes and is therefore a cost-effective alternative for patients diagnosed with partial onset seizures.

The SANAD study of effectiveness of valproate, lamotrigine, or topiramate for generalised and unclassifiable epilepsy: an unblinded randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND Valproate is widely accepted as a drug of first choice for patients with generalised onset seizures, and its broad spectrum of efficacy means it is recommended for patients with seizures that are difficult to classify. Lamotrigine and topiramate are also thought to possess broad spectrum activity. The SANAD study aimed to compare the longer-term effects of these drugs in patients with generalised onset seizures or seizures that are difficult to classify. METHODS SANAD was an unblinded randomised controlled trial in hospital-based outpatient clinics in the UK. Arm B of the study recruited 716 patients for whom valproate was considered to be standard treatment. Patients were randomly assigned to valproate, lamotrigine, or topiramate between Jan 12, 1999, and Aug 31, 2004, and follow-up data were obtained up to Jan 13, 2006. Primary outcomes were time to treatment failure, and time to 1-year remission, and analysis was by both intention to treat and per protocol. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN38354748. FINDINGS For time to treatment failure, valproate was significantly better than topiramate (hazard ratio 1.57 [95% CI 1.19-2.08]), but there was no significant difference between valproate and lamotrigine (1.25 [0.94-1.68]). For patients with an idiopathic generalised epilepsy, valproate was significantly better than both lamotrigine (1.55 [1.07-2.24] and topiramate (1.89 [1.32-2.70]). For time to 12-month remission valproate was significantly better than lamotrigine overall (0.76 [0.62-0.94]), and for the subgroup with an idiopathic generalised epilepsy 0.68 (0.53-0.89). But there was no significant difference between valproate and topiramate in either the analysis overall or for the subgroup with an idiopathic generalised epilepsy. INTERPRETATION Valproate is better tolerated than topiramate and more efficacious than lamotrigine, and should remain the drug of first choice for many patients with generalised and unclassified epilepsies. However, because of known potential adverse effects of valproate during pregnancy, the benefits for seizure control in women of childbearing years should be considered.

Safety and efficacy of buccal midazolam versus rectal diazepam for emergency treatment of seizures in children: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND Rectal diazepam and buccal midazolam are used for emergency treatment of acute febrile and afebrile (epileptic) seizures in children. We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of these drugs. METHODS A multicentre, randomised controlled trial was undertaken to compare buccal midazolam with rectal diazepam for emergency-room treatment of children aged 6 months and older presenting to hospital with active seizures and without intravenous access. The dose varied according to age from 2.5 to 10 mg. The primary endpoint was therapeutic success: cessation of seizures within 10 min and for at least 1 hour, without respiratory depression requiring intervention. Analysis was per protocol. FINDINGS Consent was obtained for 219 separate episodes involving 177 patients, who had a median age of 3 years (IQR 1-5) at initial episode. Therapeutic success was 56% (61 of 109) for buccal midazolam and 27% (30 of 110) for rectal diazepam (percentage difference 29%, 95% CI 16-41). Analysing only initial episodes revealed a similar result. The rate of respiratory depression did not differ between groups. When centre, age, known diagnosis of epilepsy, use of antiepileptic drugs, prior treatment, and length of seizure before treatment were adjusted for with logistic regression, buccal midazolam was more effective than rectal diazepam. INTERPRETATION Buccal midazolam was more effective than rectal diazepam for children presenting to hospital with acute seizures and was not associated with an increased incidence of respiratory depression.

Randomised, Placebo‐Controlled Study of Vigabatrin as First‐Line Treatment of Infantile Spasms

Summary: Purpose: Vigabatrin (VGB) has been shown to be an effective drug in the treatment of infantile spasms (West syndrome) in predominantly retrospective and open but also in prospective studies. This prospective, randomised, and placebo‐controlled trial of VGB in infantile spasms was considered to be justified and feasible to confirm or refute these previous findings.

LORAZEPAM VERSUS DIAZEPAM IN THE ACUTE TREATMENT OF EPILEPTIC SEIZURES AND STATUS EPILEPTICUS

Lorazepam was compared with diazepam for the treatment of acute convulsions and status epilepticus in 102 children in a prospective, open, ‘odd and even dates’ trial. Convulsions were controlled in 76 per cent of patients treated with a single dose of lorazepam and 51 per cent of patients treated with a single dose of diazepam. Significantly fewer patients treated with lorazepam required additional anticonvulsants to terminate the seizure. Respiratory depression occurred in 3 per cent of lorazepam‐treated patients and 15 per cent of diazepam‐treated patients. No patient who received lorazepam required admission to the intensive care unit for either respiratory depression or persisting status epilepticus. Rectally administered lorazepam appeared to be particularly valuable (100 per cent efficacy) when venous access was not possible.

The treatment of convulsive status epilepticus in children

There is currently little agreement between hospital protocols when treating convulsive status epilepticus in children, and a working party has been set up to produce a national evidence based guideline for treating this condition. This four step guideline is presented in this paper. Its effectiveness will be highlighted and its use audited in a number of centres.

Dyspraxia or developmental coordination disorder? Unravelling the enigma

Dyspraxia is an enigma to many people, both professional and lay alike—what is it, how does it relate to developmental coordination disorder and associated conditions, how common is it, how is it recognised and diagnosed and how should it be managed? This article attempts to unravel this enigma by: dealing with the terminology of coordination difficulties from the “clumsy child syndrome” through “dyspraxia” to “developmental coordination disorder (DCD)”; briefly examining the debate as to whether dyspraxia or DCD should be regarded as a medical or social disorder; discussing the differential diagnosis of dyspraxia or DCD; considering the assessment of children with dyspraxia or DCD; reviewing the range of current treatment approaches in the UK.

Gabapentin as add-on therapy in children with refractory partial seizures : A 12-week, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Summary: Purpose: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of gabapentin (Neurontin; GBP) as add‐on therapy for refractory partial seizures in paediatric patients aged 3–12 years.

Best practice guidelines for the management of women with epilepsy

Clinical guidelines for the treatment of epilepsy have been published. A statement on management issues for women with epilepsy has recently been produced by the American Academy of Neurology which has raised awareness of the issues facing women with epilepsy. The communication presented here aims to review current literature on specific issues relating to women with epilepsy, and proposes graded recommendations for its management within a UK health care framework.

Dravet syndrome as epileptic encephalopathy: evidence from long-term course and neuropathology

Dravet syndrome is an epilepsy syndrome of infantile onset, frequently caused by SCN1A mutations or deletions. Its prevalence, long-term evolution in adults and neuropathology are not well known. We identified a series of 22 adult patients, including three adult post-mortem cases with Dravet syndrome. For all patients, we reviewed the clinical history, seizure types and frequency, antiepileptic drugs, cognitive, social and functional outcome and results of investigations. A systematic neuropathology study was performed, with post-mortem material from three adult cases with Dravet syndrome, in comparison with controls and a range of relevant paediatric tissue. Twenty-two adults with Dravet syndrome, 10 female, were included, median age 39 years (range 20–66). SCN1A structural variation was found in 60% of the adult Dravet patients tested, including one post-mortem case with DNA extracted from brain tissue. Novel mutations were described for 11 adult patients; one patient had three SCN1A mutations. Features of Dravet syndrome in adulthood include multiple seizure types despite polytherapy, and age-dependent evolution in seizure semiology and electroencephalographic pattern. Fever sensitivity persisted through adulthood in 11 cases. Neurological decline occurred in adulthood with cognitive and motor deterioration. Dysphagia may develop in or after the fourth decade of life, leading to significant morbidity, or death. The correct diagnosis at an older age made an impact at several levels. Treatment changes improved seizure control even after years of drug resistance in all three cases with sufficient follow-up after drug changes were instituted; better control led to significant improvement in cognitive performance and quality of life in adulthood in two cases. There was no histopathological hallmark feature of Dravet syndrome in this series. Strikingly, there was remarkable preservation of neurons and interneurons in the neocortex and hippocampi of Dravet adult post-mortem cases. Our study provides evidence that Dravet syndrome is at least in part an epileptic encephalopathy.