Faculty Bibliography

Purpose: Evaluate efficacy of CBD added to antiepileptic drug (AED) therapy for the treatment of seizures associated with LGS. Method: Eligible patients were 2-55 years old and had a clinical diagnosis of LGS, >=8 drop seizures during 4 week baseline (>=2/week), and documented failures on >=1 AED. Patients were randomised (1:1) to receive 20 mg/kg/day CBD (oral solution) or matched placebo for 14 weeks (2-week titration; 12-week maintenance). The primary efficacy endpoint was percentage change from baseline in drop seizure frequency over the entire 14-week treatment period for patients on CBD vs. placebo. Results: 171 patients were randomised (86 CBD; 85 placebo); 14 CBD and 1 placebo patient withdrew. Groups were similar at baseline; mean age was 15 years (34% of patients >=18 years) and median drop seizures/month was 74. Patients had previously taken a median of 6 AEDs, and were taking a median of 3 concomitant AEDs. CBD resulted in a significantly greater median percent reduction in monthly drop seizures than placebo (44% vs. 22%; p = 0.0135) and a significantly greater >=50% responder rate (44% vs. 24%; p = 0.0043). The treatment difference was established in first 4 weeks of the maintenance period. Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 86% of CBD and 69% of placebo patients, and were mostly mild to moderate; those >10% were diarrhoea, somnolence, pyrexia, decreased appetite, and vomiting. Treatment-related serious AEs were reported in 9 CBD patients and 1 placebo patient. Some elevations in transaminases were noted without elevations of bilirubin; most were on concomitant valproate and all resolved. There was 1 death (CBD group), considered unrelated to treatment. Conclusion: Results from this trial suggest that CBD add-on therapy for the treatment of drop seizures associated with LGS may be efficacious, with more AEs than placebo, but generally well tolerated

The randomized controlled trial is the unequivocal gold standard for demonstrating clinical efficacy and safety of investigational therapies. Recently there have been concerns raised about prolonged exposure to placebo and ineffective therapy during the course of an add-on regulatory trial for new antiepileptic drug approval (typically approximately 6 months in duration), due to the potential risks of continued uncontrolled epilepsy for that period. The first meeting of the Research Roundtable in Epilepsy on May 19-20, 2016, focused on "Reducing placebo exposure in epilepsy clinical trials," with a goal of considering new designs for epilepsy regulatory trials that may be added to the overall development plan to make it, as a whole, safer for participants while still providing rigorous evidence of effect. This topic was motivated in part by data from a meta-analysis showing a 3- to 5-fold increased rate of sudden unexpected death in epilepsy in participants randomized to placebo or ineffective doses of new antiepileptic drugs. The meeting agenda included rationale and discussion of different trial designs, including active-control add-on trials, placebo add-on to background therapy with adjustment, time to event designs, adaptive designs, platform trials with pooled placebo control, a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic approach to reducing placebo exposure, and shorter trials when drug tolerance has been ruled out. The merits and limitations of each design were discussed and are reviewed here.

Among the priority next steps outlined during the first translational epilepsy research workshop in London, United Kingdom (2012), jointly organized by the American Epilepsy Society (AES) and the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE), are the harmonization of research practices used in preclinical studies and the development of infrastructure that facilitates multicenter preclinical studies. The AES/ILAE Translational Task Force of the ILAE has been pursuing initiatives that advance these goals. In this supplement, we present the first reports of the working groups of the Task Force that aim to improve practices of performing rodent video-electroencephalography (vEEG) studies in experimental controls, generate systematic reviews of preclinical research data, and develop preclinical common data elements (CDEs) for epilepsy research in animals.

The major objective of preclinical translational epilepsy research is to advance laboratory findings toward clinical application by testing potential treatments in animal models of seizures and epilepsy. Recently there has been a focus on the failure of preclinical discoveries to translate reliably, or even to be reproduced in different laboratories. One potential cause is a lack of standardization in preclinical data collection. The resulting difficulties in comparing data across studies have led to high cost and missed opportunity, which in turn impede clinical trials and advances in medical care. Preclinical epilepsy research has successfully brought numerous antiseizure treatments into the clinical practice, yet the unmet clinical needs have prompted the reconsideration of research strategies to optimize epilepsy therapy development. In the field of clinical epilepsy there have been successful steps to improve such problems, such as generation of common data elements (CDEs) and case report forms (CRFs and standards of data collection and reporting) by a team of leaders in the field. Therefore, the Translational Task Force was appointed by the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) and the American Epilepsy Society (AES), in partnership with the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to define CDEs for animal epilepsy research studies and prepare guidelines for data collection and experimental procedures. If adopted, the preclinical CDEs could facilitate collaborative epilepsy research, comparisons of data across different laboratories, and promote rigor, transparency, and impact, particularly in therapy development.

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: 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.

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.