Faculty Bibliography

OBJECTIVE:Many people with new-onset focal epilepsy initially seek evaluation in emergency departments (EDs), and treatment decisions in EDs can influence likelihood of seizure recurrence. Using data collected for the Human Epilepsy Project (HEP), we assessed the effect of clinical seizure characteristics on ED clinical management. METHODS:There were 447 participants with new-onset focal epilepsy seen within four months of treatment initiation who were eligible and enrolled in HEP. Seizure calendars and medical records were collected. Based on clinical descriptions, seizures were categorized by semiology according to International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) classifications as either focal non-motor or focal motor seizures. RESULTS:Overall, 279/447(62%) of participants had presented to an ED prior to or at time of epilepsy diagnosis. 132 /246 (53%) with initial non-motor seizures presented to an ED. Of these, 8 (6%) presented with a first-lifetime non-motor seizure. The other 124 (94%) presented after multiple seizures: 7 (5%) with multiple non-motor seizures, and 117 (89%) with a first-lifetime motor seizure after having prior non-motor seizures. 147/ 201 (73%) of participants with initial motor seizures presented to an ED. Of these, 134 (92%) presented with a first-lifetime motor seizure, and 13 (9%) with multiple motor seizures. There was no difference in the likelihood of anti-seizure medication (ASM) initiation between participants who had multiple prior non-motor seizures followed by a motor seizure (thereby fulfilling the criterion for an epilepsy diagnosis), vs those presenting with a single lifetime motor seizure (39% vs 43%). There was no difference in recognition of seizures as the presenting complaint (85% vs 87%), or whether the participant was admitted or referred to a neurologist (87% vs 79%). CONCLUSIONS:This study contributes to evidence of under-recognition of non-motor focal seizure semiologies in ED settings, which can support large-scale interventions aimed at improving recognition, specialist consultation, and treatment in ED settings.

Literature review of patients with KCNQ2 developmental and epileptic encephalopathy (KCNQ2-DEE) reveals, based on 16 reports including 139 patients, a clinical phenotype that includes age- and disease-specific stereotyped seizures. The typical seizure type of KCNQ2-DEE, focal tonic, starts within 0-5 days of life and is readily captured by video-electroencephalography VEEG for clinical and genetic diagnosis. After initial identification, KCNQ2-DEE seizures are clinically apparent and can be clearly identified without the use of EEG or VEEG. Therefore, we propose that the 2019 recommendations from the International League against Epilepsy (ILAE), the Pediatric Epilepsy Research Consortium (PERC), for capturing and recording seizures for clinical trials (Epilepsia Open, 4, 2019, 537) are suitable for use in KCNQ2-DEE‒associated antiseizure medicine (ASM) treatment trials. The ILAE/PERC consensus guidance states that a caregiver-maintained seizure diary, completed by caregivers who are trained to recognize seizures using within-patient historical recordings, accurately captures seizures prospectively in a clinical trial. An alternative approach historically endorsed by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) compares seizure counts captured on VEEG before and after treatment. A major advantage of the ILAE/PERC strategy is that it expands the numbers of eligible patients who meet inclusion criteria of clinical trials while maintaining accurate seizure counts (Epilepsia Open, 4, 2019, 537). Three recent phase 3 pivotal pediatric trials investigating ASMs to treat syndromic seizures in patients as young as 2 years of age (N Engl J Med, 17, 2017, 699; Lancet, 21, 2020, 2243; Lancet, 17, 2018, 1085); and ongoing phase 2 open-label pediatric clinical trial that includes pediatric epileptic syndromes as young as 1 month of age (Am J Med Genet A, 176, 2018, 773), have already used caregiver-maintained seizure diaries successfully. For determining the outcome of a KCNQ2-DEE ASM treatment trial, the use of a seizure diary to count seizures by trained observers is feasible because the seizures of KCNQ2-DEE are clinically apparent. This strategy is supported by successful precedent in clinical trials in similar age groups and has the endorsement of the international pediatric epilepsy community.

BACKGROUND:Among women with epilepsy, studies regarding changes in seizure frequency during pregnancy have been limited by the lack of an appropriate nonpregnant comparator group to provide data on the natural course of seizure frequency in both groups. METHODS:In this prospective, observational, multicenter cohort study, we compared the frequency of seizures during pregnancy through the peripartum period (the first 6 weeks after birth) (epoch 1) with the frequency during the postpartum period (the following 7.5 months after pregnancy) (epoch 2). Nonpregnant women with epilepsy were enrolled as controls and had similar follow-up during an 18-month period. The primary outcome was the percentage of women who had a higher frequency of seizures that impaired awareness during epoch 1 than during epoch 2. We also compared changes in the doses of antiepileptic drugs that were administered in the two groups during the first 9 months of epoch 1. RESULTS:We enrolled 351 pregnant women and 109 controls with epilepsy. Among the 299 pregnant women and 93 controls who had a history of seizures that impaired awareness and who had available data for the two epochs, seizure frequency was higher during epoch 1 than during epoch 2 in 70 pregnant women (23%) and in 23 controls (25%) (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54 to 1.60). During pregnancy, the dose of an antiepileptic drug was changed at least once in 74% of pregnant women and in 31% of controls (odds ratio, 6.36; 95% CI, 3.82 to 10.59). CONCLUSIONS:Among women with epilepsy, the percentage who had a higher incidence of seizures during pregnancy than during the postpartum period was similar to that in women who were not pregnant during the corresponding epochs. Changes in doses of antiepileptic drugs occurred more frequently in pregnant women than in nonpregnant women during similar time periods. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health; MONEAD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01730170.).

OBJECTIVE:To test the hypothesis that people with focal epilepsy experience diagnostic delays that may be associated with preventable morbidity, particularly when seizures have only nonmotor symptoms, we compared time to diagnosis, injuries, and motor vehicle accidents (MVAs) in people with focal nonmotor versus focal seizures with motor involvement at epilepsy onset. METHODS:This retrospective study analyzed the enrollment data from the Human Epilepsy Project, which enrolled participants between 2012 and 2017 across 34 sites in the USA, Canada, Europe, and Australia, within 4 months of treatment for focal epilepsy. A total of 447 participants were grouped by initial seizure semiology (focal nonmotor or focal with motor involvement) to compare time to diagnosis and prediagnostic injuries including MVAs. RESULTS:Demographic characteristics were similar between groups. There were 246 participants (55%) with nonmotor seizures and 201 participants (45%) with motor seizures at epilepsy onset. Median time to diagnosis from first seizure was 10 times longer in patients with nonmotor seizures compared to motor seizures at onset (P < .001). The number and severity of injuries were similar between groups. However, 82.6% of MVAs occurred in patients with undiagnosed nonmotor seizures. SIGNIFICANCE/CONCLUSIONS:This study identifies reasons for delayed diagnosis and consequences of delay in patients with new onset focal epilepsy, highlighting a treatment gap that is particularly significant in patients who experience nonmotor seizures at epilepsy onset.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused global anguish unparalleled in recent times. As cases rise, increased pressure on health services, combined with severe disruption to people's everyday lives, can adversely affect individuals living with chronic illnesses, including people with epilepsy. Stressors related to disruption to healthcare, finances, mental well-being, relationships, schooling, physical activity, and increased isolation could increase seizures and impair epilepsy self-management. We aim to understand the impact that COVID-19 has had on the health and well-being of people with epilepsy focusing on exposure to increased risk of seizures, associated comorbidity, and mortality. We designed two online surveys with one addressing people with epilepsy directly and the second for caregivers to report on behalf of a person with epilepsy. The survey is ongoing and has yielded 463 UK-based responses by the end of September 2020. Forty percent of respondents reported health changes during the pandemic (n = 185). Respondents cited a change in seizures (19%, n = 88), mental health difficulties (34%, n = 161), and sleep disruption (26%, n = 121) as the main reasons. Thirteen percent found it difficult to take medication on time. A third had difficulty accessing medical services (n = 154), with 8% having had an appointment canceled (n = 39). Only a small proportion reported having had discussions about epilepsy-related risks, such as safety precautions (16%, n = 74); mental health (29%, n = 134); sleep (30%, n = 140); and Sudden Unexpected Death in Epilepsy (SUDEP; 15%, n = 69) in the previous 12 months. These findings suggest that people with epilepsy are currently experiencing health changes, coupled with inadequate access to services. Also, there seems to be a history of poor risk communication in the months preceding the pandemic. As the UK witnesses a second COVID-19 wave, those involved in healthcare delivery must ensure optimal care is provided for people with chronic conditions, such as epilepsy, to ensure that avoidable morbidity and mortality is prevented during the pandemic, and beyond.

On May 22-24, 2019, the 15th Antiepileptic Drug and Device (AEDD) Trials Conference was held, which focused on current issues related to AEDD development from preclinical models to clinical prognostication. The conference featured regulatory agencies, academic laboratories, and healthcare companies involved in emerging epilepsy therapies and research. The program included discussions around funding and support for investigations in epilepsy and neurologic research, clinical trial design and integrated outcome measures for people with epilepsy, and drug development and upcoming disease-modifying therapies. Finally, the conference included updates from the preclinical, clinical, and device pipeline. Summaries of the talks are provided in this paper, with the various pipeline therapeutics in the listed tables to be outlined in a subsequent publication.

OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To provide information on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on people with epilepsy and provide consensus recommendations on how to provide the best possible care for people with epilepsy while avoiding visits to urgent care facilities and hospitalizations during the Novel Coronavirus pandemic. METHODS:Authors individually scored statements on a scale of -10 (strongly disagree) to +10 (strongly agree). 5/11 recommendations for physicians and 3/5 recommendations for individuals/families were rated by all authors as 7 or above (strongly agree) on the first round of rating. Subsequently, a tele-conference was held where statements for which there was a lack of strong consensus were revised. RESULTS:After revision, all consensus recommendations received a score of 7 or above. The recommendations focus on administration of as much care as possible at home to keep people with epilepsy out of health care facilities, where they are likely to encounter COVID-19 (including strategies for rescue therapy), as well as minimization of risk of seizure exacerbation through adherence, and through ensuring a regular supply of medication. We also provide helpful links to additional helpful information for people with epilepsy and health providers. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:These recommendation may help healthcare professionals provide optimal care to people with epilepsy during the coronavirus pandemic.