Faculty Bibliography

In this exciting era, we are coming closer and closer to bringing an anti-inflammatory therapy to the clinic for the purpose of seizure prevention, modification, and/or suppression. At present, it is unclear what this approach might entail, and what form it will take. Irrespective of the therapy that ultimately reaches the clinic, there will be some commonalities with regard to clinical trials. A number of animal models have now been used to identify inflammation as a major underlying mechanism of both chronic seizures and the epileptogenic process. These models have demonstrated that specific anti-inflammatory treatments can be effective at both suppressing chronic seizures and interfering with the process of epileptogenesis. Some of these have already been evaluated in early phase clinical trials. It can be expected that there will soon be more clinical trials of both "conventional, broad spectrum" anti-inflammatory agents and novel new approaches to utilizing specific anti-inflammatory therapies with drugs or other therapeutic interventions. A summary of some of those approaches appears below, as well as a discussion of the issues facing clinical trials in this new domain.

The classic epileptic encephalopathies, including infantile spasms (IS) and Lennox-Gastaut syndrome (LGS), are severe seizure disorders that usually arise sporadically. De novo variants in genes mainly encoding ion channel and synaptic proteins have been found to account for over 15% of patients with IS or LGS. The contribution of autosomal recessive genetic variation, however, is less well understood. We implemented a rare variant transmission disequilibrium test (TDT) to search for autosomal recessive epileptic encephalopathy genes in a cohort of 320 outbred patient-parent trios that were generally prescreened for rare metabolic disorders. In the current sample, our rare variant transmission disequilibrium test did not identify individual genes with significantly distorted transmission over expectation after correcting for the multiple tests. While the rare variant transmission disequilibrium test did not find evidence of a role for individual autosomal recessive genes, our current sample is insufficiently powered to assess the overall role of autosomal recessive genotypes in an outbred epileptic encephalopathy population

OBJECTIVE: Presently, there is no simple method at initial presentation for identifying a patient's likelihood of progressing to surgery and a favorable outcome. The Epilepsy Surgery Grading Scale (ESGS) is a three-tier empirically derived mathematical scale with five categories: magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), electroencephalography (EEG), concordance (between MRI and EEG), semiology, and IQ designed to stratify patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy based on their likelihood of proceeding to resective epilepsy surgery and achieving seizure freedom. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we abstracted data from the charts of all patients admitted to the New York University Langone Medical Center (NYULMC) for presurgical evaluation or presented in surgical multidisciplinary conference (MDC) at the NYU Comprehensive Epilepsy Center (CEC) from 1/1/2007 to 7/31/2008 with focal epilepsy, who met minimal criteria for treatment resistance. We classified patients into ESGS Grade 1 (most favorable), Grade 2 (intermediate), and Grade 3 (least favorable candidates). Three cohorts were evaluated: all patients, patients presented in MDC, and patients who had resective surgery. The primary outcome measure was proceeding to surgery and seizure freedom. RESULTS: Four hundred seven patients met eligibility criteria; 200 (49.1%) were presented in MDC and 113 (27.8%) underwent surgery. A significant difference was observed between Grades 1 and 3, Grades 1 and 2, and Grades 2 and 3 for all presurgical patients, and those presented in MDC, with Grade 1 patients having the highest likelihood of both having surgery and becoming seizure-free. There was no difference between Grades 1 and 2 among patients who had resective surgery. SIGNIFICANCE: These results demonstrate that by systematically using basic information available during initial assessment, patients with drug-resistant epilepsy may be successfully stratified into clinically meaningful groups with varied prognosis. The ESGS may improve communication, facilitate decision making and early referral to a CEC, and allow patients and physicians to better manage expectations.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence rates of sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) in different epilepsy populations and address the question of whether risk factors for SUDEP have been identified. METHODS: Systematic review of evidence; modified Grading Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation process for developing conclusions; recommendations developed by consensus. RESULTS: Findings for incidence rates based on 12 Class I studies include the following: SUDEP risk in children with epilepsy (aged 0-17 years) is 0.22/1,000 patient-years (95% CI 0.16-0.31) (high confidence in evidence). SUDEP risk increases in adults to 1.2/1,000 patient-years (95% CI 0.64-2.32) (low confidence in evidence). The major risk factor for SUDEP is the occurrence of generalized tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS); the SUDEP risk increases in association with increasing frequency of GTCS occurrence (high confidence in evidence). RECOMMENDATIONS: Level B: Clinicians caring for young children with epilepsy should inform parents/guardians that in 1 year, SUDEP typically affects 1 in 4,500 children; therefore, 4,499 of 4,500 children will not be affected. Clinicians should inform adult patients with epilepsy that SUDEP typically affects 1 in 1,000 adults with epilepsy per year; therefore, annually 999 of 1,000 adults will not be affected. For persons with epilepsy who continue to experience GTCS, clinicians should continue to actively manage epilepsy therapies to reduce seizures and SUDEP risk while incorporating patient preferences and weighing the risks and benefits of any new approach. Clinicians should inform persons with epilepsy that seizure freedom, particularly freedom from GTCS, is strongly associated with decreased SUDEP risk.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence rates of sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) in different epilepsy populations and address the question of whether risk factors for SUDEP have been identified. METHODS: Systematic review of evidence; modified Grading Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation process for developing conclusions; recommendations developed by consensus. RESULTS: Findings for incidence rates based on 12 Class I studies include the following: SUDEP risk in children with epilepsy (aged 0-17 years) is 0.22/1,000 patient-years (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.16-0.31) (moderate confidence in evidence). SUDEP risk increases in adults to 1.2/1,000 patient-years (95% CI 0.64-2.32) (low confidence in evidence). The major risk factor for SUDEP is the occurrence of generalized tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS); the SUDEP risk increases in association with increasing frequency of GTCS occurrence (high confidence in evidence). RECOMMENDATIONS: Level B: Clinicians caring for young children with epilepsy should inform parents/guardians that in 1 year, SUDEP typically affects 1 in 4,500 children; therefore, 4,499 of 4,500 children will not be affected. Clinicians should inform adult patients with epilepsy that SUDEP typically affects 1 in 1,000 adults with epilepsy per year; therefore, annually 999 of 1,000 adults will not be affected. For persons with epilepsy who continue to experience GTCS, clinicians should continue to actively manage epilepsy therapies to reduce seizures and SUDEP risk while incorporating patient preferences and weighing the risks and benefits of any new approach. Clinicians should inform persons with epilepsy that seizure freedom, particularly freedom from GTCS, is strongly associated with decreased SUDEP risk.

The International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Classification of the Epilepsies has been updated to reflect our gain in understanding of the epilepsies and their underlying mechanisms following the major scientific advances that have taken place since the last ratified classification in 1989. As a critical tool for the practicing clinician, epilepsy classification must be relevant and dynamic to changes in thinking, yet robust and translatable to all areas of the globe. Its primary purpose is for diagnosis of patients, but it is also critical for epilepsy research, development of antiepileptic therapies, and communication around the world. The new classification originates from a draft document submitted for public comments in 2013, which was revised to incorporate extensive feedback from the international epilepsy community over several rounds of consultation. It presents three levels, starting with seizure type, where it assumes that the patient is having epileptic seizures as defined by the new 2017 ILAE Seizure Classification. After diagnosis of the seizure type, the next step is diagnosis of epilepsy type, including focal epilepsy, generalized epilepsy, combined generalized, and focal epilepsy, and also an unknown epilepsy group. The third level is that of epilepsy syndrome, where a specific syndromic diagnosis can be made. The new classification incorporates etiology along each stage, emphasizing the need to consider etiology at each step of diagnosis, as it often carries significant treatment implications. Etiology is broken into six subgroups, selected because of their potential therapeutic consequences. New terminology is introduced such as developmental and epileptic encephalopathy. The term benign is replaced by the terms self-limited and pharmacoresponsive, to be used where appropriate. It is hoped that this new framework will assist in improving epilepsy care and research in the 21st century.