Nevitt Sarah J, Sudell Maria, Weston Jennifer, Tudur Smith Catrin, Marson Anthony G
Department of Biostatistics, University of Liverpool, Block F, Waterhouse Building, 1-5 Brownlow Hill, Liverpool, UK, L69 3GL.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Jun 29;6(6):CD011412. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011412.pub2.
Epilepsy is a common neurological condition with a worldwide prevalence of around 1%. Approximately 60% to 70% of people with epilepsy will achieve a longer-term remission from seizures, and most achieve that remission shortly after starting antiepileptic drug treatment. Most people with epilepsy are treated with a single antiepileptic drug (monotherapy) and current guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom for adults and children recommend carbamazepine or lamotrigine as first-line treatment for partial onset seizures and sodium valproate for generalised onset seizures; however a range of other antiepileptic drug (AED) treatments are available, and evidence is needed regarding their comparative effectiveness in order to inform treatment choices.
To compare the time to withdrawal of allocated treatment, remission and first seizure of 10 AEDs (carbamazepine, phenytoin, sodium valproate, phenobarbitone, oxcarbazepine, lamotrigine, gabapentin, topiramate, levetiracetam, zonisamide) currently used as monotherapy in children and adults with partial onset seizures (simple partial, complex partial or secondary generalised) or generalised tonic-clonic seizures with or without other generalised seizure types (absence, myoclonus).
We searched the following databases: Cochrane Epilepsy's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE and SCOPUS, and two clinical trials registers. We handsearched relevant journals and contacted pharmaceutical companies, original trial investigators, and experts in the field. The date of the most recent search was 27 July 2016.
We included randomised controlled trials of a monotherapy design in adults or children with partial onset seizures or generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types).
This was an individual participant data (IPD) review and network meta-analysis. Our primary outcome was 'time to withdrawal of allocated treatment', and our secondary outcomes were 'time to achieve 12-month remission', 'time to achieve six-month remission', 'time to first seizure post-randomisation', and 'occurrence of adverse events'. We presented all time-to-event outcomes as Cox proportional hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We performed pairwise meta-analysis of head-to-head comparisons between drugs within trials to obtain 'direct' treatment effect estimates and we performed frequentist network meta-analysis to combine direct evidence with indirect evidence across the treatment network of 10 drugs. We investigated inconsistency between direct estimates and network meta-analysis via node splitting. Due to variability in methods and detail of reporting adverse events, we have not performed an analysis. We have provided a narrative summary of the most commonly reported adverse events.
IPD was provided for at least one outcome of this review for 12,391 out of a total of 17,961 eligible participants (69% of total data) from 36 out of the 77 eligible trials (47% of total trials). We could not include IPD from the remaining 41 trials in analysis for a variety of reasons, such as being unable to contact an author or sponsor to request data, data being lost or no longer available, cost and resources required to prepare data being prohibitive, or local authority or country-specific restrictions.We were able to calculate direct treatment effect estimates for between half and two thirds of comparisons across the outcomes of the review, however for many of the comparisons, data were contributed by only a single trial or by a small number of participants, so confidence intervals of estimates were wide.Network meta-analysis showed that for the primary outcome 'Time to withdrawal of allocated treatment,' for individuals with partial seizures; levetiracetam performed (statistically) significantly better than both current first-line treatments carbamazepine and lamotrigine; lamotrigine performed better than all other treatments (aside from levetiracetam), and carbamazepine performed significantly better than gabapentin and phenobarbitone (high-quality evidence). For individuals with generalised onset seizures, first-line treatment sodium valproate performed significantly better than carbamazepine, topiramate and phenobarbitone (moderate- to high-quality evidence). Furthermore, for both partial and generalised onset seizures, the earliest licenced treatment, phenobarbitone seems to perform worse than all other treatments (moderate- to high-quality evidence).Network meta-analysis also showed that for secondary outcomes 'Time to 12-month remission of seizures' and 'Time to six-month remission of seizures,' few notable differences were shown for either partial or generalised seizure types (moderate- to high-quality evidence). For secondary outcome 'Time to first seizure,' for individuals with partial seizures; phenobarbitone performed significantly better than both current first-line treatments carbamazepine and lamotrigine; carbamazepine performed significantly better than sodium valproate, gabapentin and lamotrigine. Phenytoin also performed significantly better than lamotrigine (high-quality evidence). In general, the earliest licenced treatments (phenytoin and phenobarbitone) performed better than the other treatments for both seizure types (moderate- to high-quality evidence).Generally, direct evidence and network meta-analysis estimates (direct plus indirect evidence) were numerically similar and consistent with confidence intervals of effect sizes overlapping.The most commonly reported adverse events across all drugs were drowsiness/fatigue, headache or migraine, gastrointestinal disturbances, dizziness/faintness and rash or skin disorders.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the high-quality evidence provided by this review supports current guidance (e.g. NICE) that carbamazepine and lamotrigine are suitable first-line treatments for individuals with partial onset seizures and also demonstrates that levetiracetam may be a suitable alternative. High-quality evidence from this review also supports the use of sodium valproate as the first-line treatment for individuals with generalised tonic-clonic seizures (with or without other generalised seizure types) and also demonstrates that lamotrigine and levetiracetam would be suitable alternatives to either of these first-line treatments, particularly for those of childbearing potential, for whom sodium valproate may not be an appropriate treatment option due to teratogenicity.
癫痫是一种常见的神经系统疾病,全球患病率约为1%。约60%至70%的癫痫患者将实现癫痫发作的长期缓解,且大多数在开始抗癫痫药物治疗后不久即实现缓解。大多数癫痫患者采用单一抗癫痫药物(单药治疗),英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)针对成人和儿童的现行指南推荐卡马西平或拉莫三嗪作为部分性发作的一线治疗药物,丙戊酸钠用于全面性发作;然而,还有一系列其他抗癫痫药物(AED)治疗可供选择,需要有关它们相对有效性的证据以指导治疗选择。
比较目前作为单药治疗用于部分性发作(简单部分性、复杂部分性或继发性全面性)或全面性强直-阵挛发作(伴或不伴其他全面性发作类型,如失神发作、肌阵挛发作)的成人和儿童的10种抗癫痫药物(卡马西平、苯妥英、丙戊酸钠、苯巴比妥、奥卡西平、拉莫三嗪、加巴喷丁、托吡酯、左乙拉西坦、唑尼沙胺)在撤药时间、缓解时间和首次发作时间方面的差异。
我们检索了以下数据库:Cochrane癫痫专业注册库、CENTRAL、MEDLINE和SCOPUS,以及两个临床试验注册库。我们手工检索了相关期刊,并联系了制药公司、原始试验研究者和该领域的专家。最近一次检索日期为2016年7月27日。
我们纳入了针对部分性发作或全面性强直-阵挛发作(伴或不伴其他全面性发作类型)的成人或儿童的单药治疗设计的随机对照试验。
这是一项个体参与者数据(IPD)回顾和网状Meta分析。我们的主要结局是“分配治疗的撤药时间”,次要结局是“达到12个月缓解的时间”、“达到6个月缓解的时间”、“随机分组后首次发作的时间”以及“不良事件的发生情况”。我们将所有事件发生时间结局表示为Cox比例风险比(HRs)及95%置信区间(CIs)。我们对试验中药物之间的直接比较进行了成对Meta分析以获得“直接”治疗效果估计值,并进行了频率学派网状Meta分析,将直接证据与10种药物治疗网络中的间接证据相结合。我们通过节点拆分研究了直接估计值与网状Meta分析之间的不一致性。由于报告不良事件的方法和细节存在差异,我们未进行分析。我们提供了最常报告的不良事件的叙述性总结。
在77项符合条件的试验中的36项(占总试验的47%)的总共17,961名符合条件的参与者中,有12,391名(占总数据的69%)为本次回顾的至少一项结局提供了个体参与者数据。由于各种原因,我们无法将其余41项试验的个体参与者数据纳入分析,例如无法联系作者或申办者以索取数据、数据丢失或不再可用、准备数据所需的成本和资源过高,或地方当局或特定国家的限制。我们能够计算本次回顾结局中一半至三分之二比较中的直接治疗效果估计值,然而对于许多比较,数据仅由单个试验或少数参与者提供,因此估计值的置信区间较宽。网状Meta分析表明,对于主要结局“分配治疗的撤药时间”,对于部分性发作的个体;左乙拉西坦在(统计学上)显著优于当前的两种一线治疗药物卡马西平和拉莫三嗪;拉莫三嗪的表现优于所有其他治疗(除左乙拉西坦外),卡马西平显著优于加巴喷丁和苯巴比妥(高质量证据)。对于全面性发作的个体,一线治疗药物丙戊酸钠显著优于卡马西平、托吡酯和苯巴比妥(中高质量证据)。此外,对于部分性和全面性发作,最早获批的治疗药物苯巴比妥似乎比所有其他治疗效果更差(中高质量证据)。网状Meta分析还表明,对于次要结局“癫痫发作12个月缓解的时间”和“癫痫发作6个月缓解的时间”,无论是部分性还是全面性发作类型均未显示出明显差异(中高质量证据)。对于次要结局“首次发作的时间”,对于部分性发作的个体;苯巴比妥显著优于当前的两种一线治疗药物卡马西平和拉莫三嗪;卡马西平显著优于丙戊酸钠、加巴喷丁和拉莫三嗪。苯妥英也显著优于拉莫三嗪(高质量证据)。总体而言,最早获批的治疗药物(苯妥英和苯巴比妥)在两种发作类型中均比其他治疗效果更好(中高质量证据)。一般来说,直接证据和网状Meta分析估计值(直接加间接证据)在数值上相似,且效应大小的置信区间重叠。所有药物最常报告的不良事件为嗜睡/疲劳、头痛或偏头痛、胃肠道不适、头晕/昏厥以及皮疹或皮肤疾病。
总体而言,本综述提供的高质量证据支持当前指南(如NICE),即卡马西平和拉莫三嗪是部分性发作个体的合适一线治疗药物,同时也表明左乙拉西坦可能是一种合适的替代药物。本综述的高质量证据还支持使用丙戊酸钠作为全面性强直-阵挛发作(伴或不伴其他全面性发作类型)个体的一线治疗药物,同时也表明拉莫三嗪和左乙拉西坦将是这些一线治疗药物中任何一种的合适替代药物,特别是对于有生育潜力的人群,由于丙戊酸钠的致畸性,它可能不是一个合适的治疗选择。