Efficacy and safety of add‐on antiseizure medications for focal epilepsy: A network meta‐analysis

Author:

Zhang Hesheng1ORCID,Ou Zhujing1,Zhang Enhui1,Liu Wenyu1,Hao Nanya1,Chen Yujie1ORCID,Liu Yutong2,Ye Hui2,Zhou Dong1ORCID,Wu Xintong1

Affiliation:

1. Neurology Department West China Hospital of Sichuan University Chengdu Sichuan China

2. Ignis Therapeutics (Shanghai) Limited Shanghai China

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveSeveral antiseizure medications (ASMs) have been approved for the treatment of focal epilepsy. However, there is a paucity of evidence on direct comparison of ASMs. We evaluated the comparative efficacy and safety of all approved add‐on ASMs for the treatment of focal epilepsy using network meta‐analysis.MethodsData through extensive literature search was retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and ClinicalTrial.gov databases using predefined search terms from inception through March 2023. PRISMA reporting guidelines (CRD42023403450) were followed in this study. Efficacy outcomes assessed were ≥50%, ≥75%, and 100% responder rates. Patient retention rate and safety outcomes such as overall treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and individual TEAEs were assessed. “Gemtc” 4.0.4 package was used to perform Bayesian analysis. Outcomes are reported as relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence interval (CI).ResultsLiterature search retrieved 5807 studies of which, 75 studies were included in the analysis. All ASMs showed significantly higher ≥50% responder rate compared with placebo. Except the ≥75% seizure frequency reduction for zonisamide (2.23; 95% CI: 1.00–5.70) and 100% for rufinamide (2.03; 95% CI: 0.54–11.00), all other interventions showed significantly higher ≥75% and 100% responder rates compared with placebo. Among treatments, significantly higher 100% responder rate was observed with cenobamate compared to eslicarbazepine (10.71; 95% CI: 1.56–323.9) and zonisamide (10.63; 95% CI: 1.37–261.2). All ASMs showed a lower patient retention rate compared to placebo, with the least significant value observed for oxcarbazepine (0.77; 95% CI: 0.7–0.84). Levetiracetam showed a lower risk of incidence (1.0; 95%CI: 0.94–1.1; SUCRA: 0.885067) for overall TEAE compared with other medications.SignificanceAll approved ASMs were effective as add‐on treatment for focal epilepsy. Of the ASMs included, cenobamate had the greatest likelihood of allowing patients to attain seizure freedom.Plain Language SummaryThis article compares the efficacy and safety of antiseizure medications (ASMs) currently available to neurologists in the treatment of epileptic patients. Several newer generation ASMs that have been developed may be as effective or better than the older medications. We included 75 studies in the analysis. In comparison, all drugs improved ≥50%, ≥75% and 100% responder rates compared to control, except for Zonisamide and Rufinamide in the ≥75% and 100% responder rate categories. Retention of patients undergoing treatment was lower in drugs than placebo. All drugs were tolerated, the levetiracetam showed the best tolerability. Cenobamate more likely help completely to reduce seizures.

Funder

Science and Technology Department of Sichuan Province

National Natural Science Foundation of China

Publisher

Wiley

Reference103 articles.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3