| Title |
Comparative efficacy of antiepileptic drugs for patients with generalized epileptic seizures: systematic review and network meta-analyses
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy, May 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11096-018-0641-9 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marília Silveira de Almeida Campos, Lorena Rocha Ayres, Manuela Roque Siane Morelo, Fabiana Angelo Marques Carizio, Leonardo Régis Leira Pereira |
| Abstract |
Background Valproate is a widely prescribed antiepileptic drug for generalized epilepsies, due to the extensive knowledge on its efficacy since it is on the market for many decades. However, a large number of new antiepileptic medicines was introduced into clinical practice and may be better options for treatment, considering that these medicines differ in terms of efficacy spectrum. Despite extensive research, questions regarding which medicine would constitute the first option for the monotherapy treatment of generalized epilepsy remain. Aim of the Review To compare the relative efficacy of all available antiepileptic drugs in the monotherapy treatment of generalized epileptic seizures; and also to compare all antiepoileptig drugs with valproate, which is the current first-line treatment for generalized epilepsy. Methods A systematic review for randomized controlled clinical trials was performed. Network meta-analyses used Bayesian random effects model. Sensitivity analyses determined the results´ robustness. The relative probability of two efficacy outcomes ("Seizure free" and "Therapeutic inefficacy") to happen for each medcicine was calculated using the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking Curve. Results Seven papers (1809 patients) studied the efficacy of valproate, lamotrigine, phenytoin, carbamazepine, topiramate, levetiracetam, and phenobarbital in the treatment of generalized tonicclonic, tonic, and clonic seizures. Phenytoin demonstrated to be inferior to valproate in leaving the patient free of these seizures types [OR: 0.50 (95% CrI 0.27, 0.87)]. Lamotrigine (61%) showed the highest probability of presenting the outcome "Seizure free", followed by levetiracetam (47%), topiramate (44%), and valproate (38%) in the treatment of generalized tonic-clonic, tonic, and clonic seizures. Meanwhile, valproate exhibited greater chance of presenting the outcome "Therapeutic inefficacy" (62%). Regarding absence seizures itself, there was no difference in the efficacy of lamotrigine and ethosuximide when compared to valproate. However, the ranking indicates that ethosuximide (52%) and valproate (47%) are both more likely than lamotrigine to keep the patient free of seizures. Conclusions Lamotrigine, levetiracetam, and topiramate are as effective as valproate for treating generalized tonic-clonic, tonic, and clonic seizures. Meanwhile, valproate and ethosuximide are the best options for the treatment of absence seizures promoting better control of seizures, which is the primary goal of pharmacotherapy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| India | 1 | 33% |
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 59 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 17% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 14% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Unknown | 17 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 25% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 8 | 14% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 12% |
| Unknown | 19 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 November 2021.
All research outputs
#14,567,186
of 23,330,477 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#743
of 1,121 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,741
of 328,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy
#22
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,330,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,121 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,191 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.