Faculty Bibliography

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are statements that provide evidence-based recommendations aimed at optimizing patient care. However, many other documents are often published as "guidelines" when they are not; these documents, although also important in clinical practice, are usually not systematically produced following rigorous processes linking the evidence to the recommendations. Specifically, the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) guideline development toolkit aims to ensure that high-quality CPGs are developed to fill knowledge gaps and optimize the management of epilepsy. In addition to adhering to key methodological processes, guideline developers need to consider that effective CPGs should lead to improvements in clinical processes of care and health care outcomes. This requires monitoring the effectiveness of epilepsy-related CPGs and interventions to remove the barriers to epilepsy CPG implementation. This article provides an overview of what distinguishes quality CPGs from other documents and discusses their benefits and limitations. We summarize the recently revised ILAE CPG development process and elaborate on the barriers and facilitators to guideline dissemination, implementation, and adaptation.

Importance/UNASSIGNED:Cannabidiol has shown efficacy in randomized clinical trials for drug-resistant epilepsy in specific syndromes that predominantly affect children. However, high-level evidence for the efficacy and safety of cannabidiol in the most common form of drug-resistant epilepsy in adults, focal epilepsy, is lacking. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To investigate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of transdermally administered cannabidiol in adults with drug-resistant focal epilepsy. Design, Setting, and Participants/UNASSIGNED:A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter clinical trial at 14 epilepsy trial centers in Australia and New Zealand. Participants were adults with drug-resistant focal epilepsy receiving a stable regimen of up to 3 antiseizure medications. Data were analyzed from July 2017 to November 2018. Interventions/UNASSIGNED:Eligible participants were randomized (1:1:1) to 195-mg or 390-mg transdermal cannabidiol or placebo twice daily for 12 weeks, after which they could enroll in an open-label extension study for up to 2 years. Main Outcomes and Measures/UNASSIGNED:Seizure frequency was self-reported using a daily diary. The primary efficacy end point was the least squares mean difference in the log-transformed total seizure frequency per 28-day period, adjusted to a common baseline log seizure rate, during the 12-week treatment period. Results/UNASSIGNED:A total of 188 patients (45% male [85 patients] and 54.8% female [103 patients]) with a mean (SD) age of 39.2 (12.78) years were randomized, treated, and analyzed (195-mg cannabidiol, 63 participants; 390-mg cannabidiol, 62 participants; placebo, 63 participants). At week 12 of the double-blind period, there was no difference in seizure frequency between placebo (mean [SD] 2.49 [1.31] seizures per 28 days) and 195-mg cannabidiol (mean [SD] 2.51 [1.15] seizures per 28 days; least squares mean difference, 0.014; 95% CI, -0.175 to 0.203; P = .89) or 390-mg cannabidiol (mean [SD] 2.59 [1.12] seizures per 28 days; least squares mean difference, 0.096; 95% CI, -0.093 to 0.285; P = .32). By month 6 of the open-label extension, 115 patients (60.8%) achieved a seizure reduction of at least 50%. Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 50.4% (63 of 125 participants) of the cannabidiol group vs 41.3% (26 of 63 participants) in the placebo group, with a treatment difference of 9.1% (95% CI, -6.0% to 23.6%), and occurred at similar rates in the cannabidiol groups. Few participants discontinued (7% [14 of 188 participants]), and most (98% [171 of 174 participants]) continued into the open-label extension. Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:Both doses of transdermal cannabidiol were well tolerated and safe. No significant difference in efficacy was observed between cannabidiol and placebo during the double-blind treatment period. The open-label extension demonstrated the long-term safety, tolerability, and acceptability of transdermal cannabidiol delivery. Trial Registration/UNASSIGNED:ACTRN12616000510448 (double-blind); ACTRN12616001455459 (open-label).

In 2017, the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) Classification of Epilepsies described the "genetic generalized epilepsies" (GGEs), which contained the "idiopathic generalized epilepsies" (IGEs). The goal of this paper is to delineate the four syndromes comprising the IGEs, namely childhood absence epilepsy, juvenile absence epilepsy, juvenile myoclonic epilepsy, and epilepsy with generalized tonic-clonic seizures alone. We provide updated diagnostic criteria for these IGE syndromes determined by the expert consensus opinion of the ILAE's Task Force on Nosology and Definitions (2017-2021) and international external experts outside our Task Force. We incorporate current knowledge from recent advances in genetic, imaging, and electroencephalographic studies, together with current terminology and classification of seizures and epilepsies. Patients that do not fulfill criteria for one of these syndromes, but that have one, or a combination, of the following generalized seizure types: absence, myoclonic, tonic-clonic and myoclonic-tonic-clonic seizures, with 2.5-5.5 Hz generalized spike-wave should be classified as having GGE. Recognizing these four IGE syndromes as a special grouping among the GGEs is helpful, as they carry prognostic and therapeutic implications.

Epilepsy syndromes have been recognized for >50 years, as distinct electroclinical phenotypes with therapeutic and prognostic implications. Nonetheless, no formally accepted International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) classification of epilepsy syndromes has existed. The ILAE Task Force on Nosology and Definitions was established to reach consensus regarding which entities fulfilled criteria for an epilepsy syndrome and to provide definitions for each syndrome. We defined an epilepsy syndrome as "a characteristic cluster of clinical and electroencephalographic features, often supported by specific etiological findings (structural, genetic, metabolic, immune, and infectious)." The diagnosis of a syndrome in an individual with epilepsy frequently carries prognostic and treatment implications. Syndromes often have age-dependent presentations and a range of specific comorbidities. This paper describes the guiding principles and process for syndrome identification in both children and adults, and the template of clinical data included for each syndrome. We divided syndromes into typical age at onset, and further characterized them based on seizure and epilepsy types and association with developmental and/or epileptic encephalopathy or progressive neurological deterioration. Definitions for each specific syndrome are contained within the corresponding position papers.

The goal of this paper is to provide updated diagnostic criteria for the epilepsy syndromes that have a variable age of onset, based on expert consensus of the International League Against Epilepsy Nosology and Definitions Taskforce (2017-2021). We use language consistent with current accepted epilepsy and seizure classifications and incorporate knowledge from advances in genetics, electroencephalography, and imaging. Our aim in delineating the epilepsy syndromes that present at a variable age is to aid diagnosis and to guide investigations for etiology and treatments for these patients.

OBJECTIVE:A recent FDA warning concerning an arrhythmogenic potential of lamotrigine created concern in the neurological community. This warning was based on in vitro studies, but no clinically relevant risk was considered. This rapid systematic review aims to elucidate the risk of lamotrigine on sudden death or electrocardiogram abnormalities. METHODS:We conducted a systematic search of Ovid Medline and Ovid Embase, including randomized controlled trials and observational studies, studies of people with or without epilepsy, with one of the following outcome measures: SUDEP and sudden cardiac death, as well as the development or worsening of electrocardiogram abnormalities. All titles and abstracts were independently screened, and the full texts of relevant studies were obtained. We re-evaluated the sudden death definitions used in all included studies, as some could have used unclear or overlapping definitions. We used the American Academy of Neurology risk of bias tool to evaluate the class of evidence and the GRADE approach to evaluate our confidence in the evidence. RESULTS:We included 26 studies with 24,962 participants, of whom 2,326 used lamotrigine. Twelve studies showed no significant risk of SUDEP for lamotrigine users. One study reporting on sudden cardiac death and three studies with unclear sudden death definitions did not report an elevated risk of death in lamotrigine users compared to controls. In 10 studies reporting on electrocardiogram parameters, there was no statistically significant increased risk among lamotrigine users except for two studies. These two studies reported either "slight increases" in PR interval or an increased PQ interval that the primary study authors felt to be more related to structural cardiac differences rather than an effect of lamotrigine. One study was rated class II while all others were class III or IV. We had "very low confidence" in the evidence following the GRADE assessment. None of the studies examined the risk of lamotrigine in people with pre-existing cardiac conditions. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:There is insufficient evidence to support or refute that lamotrigine is associated with sudden death or electrocardiogram changes, in people with or without epilepsy as compared to ASM or placebo. This is due to the high risk of bias in most studies and low precision and inconsistency in the reported results.

Light flashes, patterns, or color changes can provoke seizures in up to 1 in 4000 persons. Prevalence may be higher because of selection bias. The Epilepsy Foundation reviewed light-induced seizures in 2005. Since then, images on social media, virtual reality, three-dimensional (3D) movies, and the Internet have proliferated. Hundreds of studies have explored the mechanisms and presentations of photosensitive seizures, justifying an updated review. This literature summary derives from a nonsystematic literature review via PubMed using the terms "photosensitive" and "epilepsy." The photoparoxysmal response (PPR) is an electroencephalography (EEG) phenomenon, and photosensitive seizures (PS) are seizures provoked by visual stimulation. Photosensitivity is more common in the young and in specific forms of generalized epilepsy. PS can coexist with spontaneous seizures. PS are hereditable and linked to recently identified genes. Brain imaging usually is normal, but special studies imaging white matter tracts demonstrate abnormal connectivity. Occipital cortex and connected regions are hyperexcitable in subjects with light-provoked seizures. Mechanisms remain unclear. Video games, social media clips, occasional movies, and natural stimuli can provoke PS. Virtual reality and 3D images so far appear benign unless they contain specific provocative content, for example, flashes. Images with flashes brighter than 20 candelas/m² at 3-60 (particularly 15-20) Hz occupying at least 10 to 25% of the visual field are a risk, as are red color flashes or oscillating stripes. Equipment to assay for these characteristics is probably underutilized. Prevention of seizures includes avoiding provocative stimuli, covering one eye, wearing dark glasses, sitting at least two meters from screens, reducing contrast, and taking certain antiseizure drugs. Measurement of PPR suppression in a photosensitivity model can screen putative antiseizure drugs. Some countries regulate media to reduce risk. Visually-induced seizures remain significant public health hazards so they warrant ongoing scientific and regulatory efforts and public education.

The International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) seizure classification scheme has been periodically updated to improve its reliability and applicability to clinicians and researchers alike. Here, members of the Epilepsy Study Consortium propose a pragmatic seizure classification, based on the ILAE scheme, designed for use in clinical trials with a focus on outcome measures that have high reliability, broad interpretability across stakeholders, and clinical relevance in the context of the development of novel antiseizure medications. Controversies around the current ILAE classification scheme are discussed in the context of clinical trials, and pragmatic simplifications to the existing scheme are proposed, for intended use by investigators, industry sponsors, and regulatory agencies.