Faculty Bibliography

On June 5 and 6, 2014, the Epilepsy Foundation held its 4th Biennial Epilepsy Pipeline Update Conference, an initiative of the Epilepsy Therapy Project, which showcased the most promising epilepsy innovations from health-care companies and academic laboratories dedicated to pioneering and advancing drugs, biologics, technologies, devices, and diagnostics for epilepsy. Speakers and attendees included emerging biotech and medical technology companies, major pharmaceutical and device companies, as well as investigators and innovators at the cutting-edge of epilepsy. The program included panel discussions on collaboration between small and large companies, how to get products in need of funding to the marketplace, who is currently funding epilepsy and CNS innovation, and how the NIH facilitates early-stage drug development. Finally, the conference featured the third annual "Shark Tank" competition. The presentations are summarized in this paper, which is followed by a compilation of the meeting poster abstracts.

The current study examined psychosocial correlates of medication adherence in a socioeconomically and racially diverse sample of patients with epilepsy. Fifty-five patients with epilepsy completed standardized self-report questionnaires measuring depression, stress, social support, and medication and illness beliefs. Antiepileptic drug (AED) adherence was measured using the 8-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale 36% reported poor adherence. We tested which psychosocial factors were independently and most strongly associated with AED adherence. Stress and depression were negatively correlated with adherence, while perceived social support was positively correlated with adherence (Ps<.05). When all three of these variables and relevant covariates in a multiple regression model were included, only perceived social support remained a significant predictor of adherence (P=.015). This study is one of the first to suggest the importance of targeting social support in screening and intervention approaches in order to improve AED adherence among low-income, racially/ethnically diverse patients with epilepsy.

OBJECTIVE: To provide evidence-based recommendations for treatment of adults with an unprovoked first seizure. METHODS: We defined relevant questions and systematically reviewed published studies according to the American Academy of Neurology's classification of evidence criteria; we based recommendations on evidence level. RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Adults with an unprovoked first seizure should be informed that their seizure recurrence risk is greatest early within the first 2 years (21%-45%) (Level A), and clinical variables associated with increased risk may include a prior brain insult (Level A), an EEG with epileptiform abnormalities (Level A), a significant brain-imaging abnormality (Level B), and a nocturnal seizure (Level B). Immediate antiepileptic drug (AED) therapy, as compared with delay of treatment pending a second seizure, is likely to reduce recurrence risk within the first 2 years (Level B) but may not improve quality of life (Level C). Over a longer term (>3 years), immediate AED treatment is unlikely to improve prognosis as measured by sustained seizure remission (Level B). Patients should be advised that risk of AED adverse events (AEs) may range from 7% to 31% (Level B) and that these AEs are likely predominantly mild and reversible. Clinicians' recommendations whether to initiate immediate AED treatment after a first seizure should be based on individualized assessments that weigh the risk of recurrence against the AEs of AED therapy, consider educated patient preferences, and advise that immediate treatment will not improve the long-term prognosis for seizure remission but will reduce seizure risk over the subsequent 2 years.

OBJECTIVE: To report long-term efficacy and safety results of the SANTE trial investigating deep brain stimulation of the anterior nucleus of the thalamus (ANT) for treatment of localization-related epilepsy. METHODS: This long-term follow-up is a continuation of a previously reported trial of 5- vs 0-V ANT stimulation. Long-term follow-up began 13 months after device implantation with stimulation parameters adjusted at the investigators' discretion. Seizure frequency was determined using daily seizure diaries. RESULTS: The median percent seizure reduction from baseline at 1 year was 41%, and 69% at 5 years. The responder rate (>/=50% reduction in seizure frequency) at 1 year was 43%, and 68% at 5 years. In the 5 years of follow-up, 16% of subjects were seizure-free for at least 6 months. There were no reported unanticipated adverse device effects or symptomatic intracranial hemorrhages. The Liverpool Seizure Severity Scale and 31-item Quality of Life in Epilepsy measure showed statistically significant improvement over baseline by 1 year and at 5 years (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Long-term follow-up of ANT deep brain stimulation showed sustained efficacy and safety in a treatment-resistant population. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This long-term follow-up provides Class IV evidence that for patients with drug-resistant partial epilepsy, anterior thalamic stimulation is associated with a 69% reduction in seizure frequency and a 34% serious device-related adverse event rate at 5 years.

There is an urgent need for preclinical translational efforts to be realized as breakthroughs in therapy for the many patients with life-altering conditions affecting the CNS. Despite intensive efforts, few transformative therapies have emerged, and many new potential therapies that looked promising in preclinical development have failed in the clinic. In this Perspective, we suggest that if preclinical scientists partner early with clinical scientists, they can begin to envision the pathway forward for their work through clinical trials. Options might include determining the populations to be treated, issues of dose selection, timing of intervention, duration of intervention, and the availability of biomarkers. In addition, understanding other factors that impact the likelihood that a proof-of-concept trial can be performed, as well as other critical issues, will altogether increase the attractiveness of the project to investors and partners and will also increase the likelihood that the intervention will succeed in the clinic.

OBJECTIVE:To investigate the cumulative probability of death and the standardised mortality ratio (SMR) in an adult drug-resistant epilepsy (DRE) population. METHODS:In two separate centres during 2003-2006, we identified a total of 433 patients with DRE defined as at least one seizure per month and failure of at least two antiepileptic drugs. These patients were subsequently followed for a total follow-up of 6 years. We examined the cumulative probability of death, using Kaplan-Meier methodology, and the SMR based on mortality data from the Social Security Death Index. Clinical predictors of death were evaluated using Cox regression analysis. RESULTS:The cumulative probability of death was 8.7% (95% CI 6.2% to 12.1%) at 6 years. The overall SMR was 2.4 (95% CI 1.7 to 3.3). It was 3.1; 95% CI 2.0 to 4.6 in subjects with remote or progressive aetiology and 1.7; 95% CI 0.8 to 2.8 in subjects with unknown aetiology. The SMR was significantly increased in those with a known remote aetiology (2.5; 95% CI (1.4 to 3.8)). Older age at enrolment and symptomatic generalised epilepsy syndrome were significant predictors of death. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS:Mortality is increased in this drug-resistant population; largely driven by those with a known epilepsy aetiology. The increased mortality remains even after exclusion of those with a progressive aetiology. Previous studies of incident epilepsy cohorts revealed increased mortality that declines to near-normal levels after the first several years, but in our DRE cohort, mortality remains elevated despite a median duration of epilepsy of 25 years at study entry.

OBJECTIVE: There is not yet a clear consensus on the incidence of sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP) or the extent of its burden on public health. In this systematic review, we seek to summarize the incidence of SUDEP and its age distribution, as well as the years of potential life lost and cumulative risks of SUDEP for persons with epilepsy. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search for epidemiologic studies of sudden death in epilepsy and rated their quality of evidence. We pooled data from comparable higher quality population-based studies of SUDEP incidence across all age groups, calculating the overall incidence of SUDEP per 100,000 population, and per 1,000 people with epilepsy. Using standard formulas, we also calculated the years of potential life lost and cumulative risks associated with SUDEP. RESULTS: SUDEP has an estimated overall crude annual incidence rate of 0.81 cases per 100,000 population, or 1.16 cases per 1,000 patients with epilepsy. Comparing years of potential life lost from SUDEP with selected other neurologic diseases, SUDEP ranks second only to stroke. SIGNIFICANCE: Despite limitations to the data on which our analysis is based, we conclude that the public health burden of SUDEP, which has previously been underappreciated, is substantial and deserves much more attention from clinicians, researchers, and the public health community. A PowerPoint slide summarizing this article is available for download in the Supporting Information section here.