Pitkänen Asla, Kubova Hana
A.I. Virtanen Institute for Molecular Sciences, University of Kuopio, Kuopio, Finland.
Expert Opin Pharmacother. 2004 Apr;5(4):777-98. doi: 10.1517/14656566.5.4.777.
Antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) are designed to prevent and suppress seizure activity. Their effects on calcium influx and molecular cascades contributing to necrotic and apoptotic neuronal death, however, suggests that they have functions other than just suppression of excitability. The neuroprotective effects of 20 AEDs currently in use or being investigated in Phase II - III clinical trials for treatment of epilepsy are reviewed. Data analyses is complicated by several factors. Firstly, the available data on the neuroprotective effects of different AEDs varies largely. Secondly, most of the evidence demonstrating neuroprotective effects comes from stroke models and it is uncertain whether these data can be extrapolated to other conditions, such as status epilepticus (SE) or traumatic brain injury. Thirdly, data obtained in adult animals cannot be extrapolated to young animals without caution. For example, AEDs protecting adult brain from stroke or SE-induced injury can cause apoptosis in immature brain. Finally, data comparison is complicated by the variability in study designs and methodologies between studies. With these caveats in mind, an analysis of the available data suggests that AEDs with different mechanisms of action can have mild-to-moderate neuroprotective effects. It is difficult, however, to associate the neuroprotective effects with a favourable functional outcome. For example, it is difficult to conclude that administration of AEDs during the latency phase would have an effect on the molecular cascades underlying epileptogenesis. The few favourable data demonstrating a decrease in the incidence of epilepsy after SE are probably related to the administration of AEDs during SE, which resulted in modification/alleviation of the insult itself and consequently, reduced its epileptogenecity. These experimental data, however, are clinically important because they show that early intervention of SE has an effect on long-term functional outcome. These observations emphasise the need to use additional outcome measures, such as markers of normal development or cognitive performance, when the benefits of neuroprotection achieved by the use of neuroprotective AEDs are assessed.
抗癫痫药物(AEDs)旨在预防和抑制癫痫发作活动。然而,它们对钙内流以及导致坏死性和凋亡性神经元死亡的分子级联反应的影响表明,它们具有除抑制兴奋性之外的其他功能。本文综述了目前正在使用或正在进行II - III期临床试验以治疗癫痫的20种AEDs的神经保护作用。数据分析因几个因素而变得复杂。首先,关于不同AEDs神经保护作用的现有数据差异很大。其次,大多数证明神经保护作用的证据来自中风模型,并且不确定这些数据是否可以外推到其他情况,如癫痫持续状态(SE)或创伤性脑损伤。第三,在成年动物中获得的数据不能不加谨慎地外推到幼小动物。例如,保护成年大脑免受中风或SE诱导损伤的AEDs可导致未成熟大脑中的细胞凋亡。最后,由于研究之间研究设计和方法的变异性,数据比较变得复杂。考虑到这些注意事项,对现有数据的分析表明,具有不同作用机制的AEDs可具有轻度至中度的神经保护作用。然而,很难将神经保护作用与良好的功能结果联系起来。例如,很难得出在潜伏期给予AEDs会对癫痫发生的分子级联反应产生影响的结论。少数显示SE后癫痫发病率降低的有利数据可能与SE期间给予AEDs有关,这导致了损伤本身的改变/减轻,从而降低了其致痫性。然而,这些实验数据在临床上很重要,因为它们表明SE的早期干预对长期功能结果有影响。这些观察结果强调,在评估使用神经保护AEDs实现的神经保护益处时,需要使用额外的结果指标,如正常发育或认知表现的标志物。