Search

Accumulating evidence suggests amyloid and tau-related neurodegeneration may play a role in development of late-onset epilepsy of unknown etiology (LOEU). In this article, we review recent evidence that epilepsy may be an initial manifestation of an amyloidopathy or tauopathy that precedes development of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Patients with LOEU demonstrate an increased risk of cognitive decline, and patients with AD have increased prevalence of preceding epilepsy. Moreover, investigations of LOEU that use CSF biomarkers and imaging techniques have identified preclinical neurodegeneration with evidence of amyloid and tau deposition. Overall, findings to date suggest a relationship between acquired, non-lesional late-onset epilepsy and amyloid and tau-related neurodegeneration, which supports that preclinical or prodromal AD is a distinct etiology of late-onset epilepsy. We propose criteria for assessing elevated risk of developing dementia in patients with late-onset epilepsy utilizing clinical features, available imaging techniques, and biomarker measurements. Further research is needed to validate these criteria and assess optimal treatment strategies for patients with probable epileptic preclinical AD and epileptic prodromal AD.

Background and objectivesAlthough moderate and severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) can cause posttraumatic epilepsy (PTE), many patients with functional seizures (FS) also report a history of mild TBI. To determine whether features of TBI history differ between patients with epileptic seizures (ES) and FS, we compared patient reports of TBI severity, symptoms, and causes of injury.MethodsWe recruited patients undergoing video-EEG evaluation for the diagnosis of ES, FS, mixed ES and FS, or physiologic seizure-like events at an academic, tertiary referral center. Patients and their caregivers were interviewed before final video-EEG diagnosis regarding their TBI histories, including concussive symptoms and causes of injury.ResultsOf 506 patients, a greater percentage of patients with FS reported a history of TBI than patients with ES (70% vs 59%, aOR = 1.75 [95% CI: 1.00-3.05], p = 0.047). TBI with loss of consciousness (LOC) lasting less than 30 minutes was more frequently reported among patients with FS than with ES (27% vs 13%, aOR = 2.38 [1.26-4.47], p < 0.01). The proportion of patients reporting other neurologic symptoms immediately after TBI was not significantly different between FS and ES (40% vs 29%, p = 0.08). Causes of TBI were found to differ, with TBIs caused by falls from a height (17% vs 10%, aOR = 2.24 [1.06-4.70], p = 0.03) or motor vehicle collisions (27% vs 11%, aOR = 2.96 [1.54-5.67], p < 0.01) reported more frequently in FS than ES.DiscussionOur findings further the association of mild TBI with FS and prompt reconsideration of typical assumptions regarding the significance of a reported TBI history in patients with previously undifferentiated seizures. Although common in both groups, TBI with LOC less than 30 minutes and causes of injury that are commonly believed to be more severe were reported more frequently in FS than ES. This suggests that a patient or caregiver reporting of these features does not imply that PTE is a more probable diagnosis than FS. Although a history of TBI with LOC and presumed high-risk causes of injury intuitively raises suspicion for PTE, clinicians should be cautioned that these historical factors also were a frequent finding in patients with FS.

IntroductionOur objective was to provide expert consensus recommendations to improve treatment tolerability through dose adjustments of concomitant antiseizure medications (ASMs) during addition of cenobamate to existing ASM therapy in adult patients with uncontrolled focal seizures.MethodsA panel of seven epileptologists experienced in the use of ASMs, including cenobamate, used a modified Delphi process to reach consensus. The panelists discussed tolerability issues with concomitant ASMs during cenobamate titration and practical strategies for dose adjustments that may prevent or mitigate adverse effects. The resulting recommendations consider concomitant ASM dose level and specify proactive (prior to report of an adverse effect) and reactive (in response to report of an adverse effect) dose adjustment suggestions based on concomitant ASM pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions with cenobamate. Specific dose adjustment recommendations are provided.ResultsWe recommend proactively lowering the dose of clobazam, phenytoin, and phenobarbital due to their known drug-drug interactions with cenobamate, and lacosamide due to a pharmacodynamic interaction with cenobamate, to prevent adverse effects during cenobamate titration. Reactive lowering of a concomitant ASM dose is sufficient for other ASMs at standard dosing owing to quick resolution of adverse effects. For carbamazepine and lamotrigine doses exceeding the upper end of standard dosing (e.g., carbamazepine, greater than 1200 mg/day; lamotrigine, greater than 500 mg/day), we encourage consideration of proactive dose reduction at cenobamate 200 mg/day to prevent potential adverse effects. All dose reductions for adverse effects can be repeated every 2 weeks as dictated by the adverse effects. At cenobamate 200 mg/day, we recommend that patients be evaluated for marked improvement of seizures and further dose reductions be considered to reduce potentially unnecessary polypharmacy.ConclusionThe primary goal of the recommended dose reductions of concomitant ASMs is to prevent or resolve adverse effects, thereby allowing cenobamate to reach the optimal dose to achieve the maximal potential of improving seizure control.

Patients with epilepsy, who later succumb to sudden unexpected death, show altered brain tissue volumes in selected regions. It is unclear whether the alterations in brain tissue volume represent changes in neurons or glial properties, since volumetric procedures have limited sensitivity to assess the source of volume changes (e.g., neuronal loss or glial cell swelling). We assessed a measure, entropy, which can determine tissue homogeneity by evaluating tissue randomness, and thus, shows tissue integrity; the measure is easily calculated from T1-weighted images. T1-weighted images were collected with a 3.0-Tesla MRI from 53 patients with tonic-clonic (TC) seizures and 53 healthy controls; images were bias-corrected, entropy maps calculated, normalized to a common space, smoothed, and compared between groups (TC patients and controls using ANCOVA; covariates, age and sex; SPM12, family-wise error correction for multiple comparisons, p

ObjectiveTo explore the perspectives of adult patients with epilepsy, caregivers, and health care professionals (HCPs) on treatment for seizures and treatment decisions, we developed and administered the STEP Survey (Seize the Truth of Epilepsy Perceptions).MethodsParticipants were recruited from online panel M3 and by Rare Patient Voice and completed the self-administered online STEP Survey. Analysis of variance and chi-square tests were used for group comparisons.ResultsThe STEP Survey was completed by 400 adult patients, 201 caregivers, and 258 HCPs. Patients estimated reporting 45% of their seizures to their HCP, whereas caregivers estimated 83% and HCPs estimated 73% were reported. The most common reason for not reporting seizures was that the seizures were not serious enough to mention (patients 57%; caregivers 66%). A minority of patients (25%) and caregivers (30%) were very or extremely likely to ask their HCP about changing antiseizure medication (ASM) in the next 12 months. The HCP was most frequently selected by patients, caregivers, and HCPs as the person who initiates discussion of changing ASMs (patients 73%/caregivers 66%/HCPs 75%) and increasing ASM dosage (patients 77%/caregivers 68%/HCPs 81%). A majority of patients (65%) and caregivers (68%) somewhat or strongly agreed that they do not change ASMs due to fear of getting worse. HCPs perceive this fear less often, stating that 50% of their patients feel afraid when a second ASM was added.ConclusionsImproved reporting of all seizures, discussion of treatment changes, and the impact of fear on treatment decisions provide opportunities to reduce complacency and optimize patient outcomes.

ObjectiveTranscranial Focused Ultrasound (tFUS) is a promising new potential neuromodulation tool. However, the safety of tFUS neuromodulation has not yet been assessed adequately. Patients with refractory temporal lobe epilepsy electing to undergo an anterior temporal lobe resection present a unique opportunity to evaluate the safety and efficacy of tFUS neuromodulation. Histological changes in tissue after tFUS can be examined after surgical resection, while further potential safety concerns can be assessed using neuropsychological testing.MethodsNeuropsychological functions were assessed in eight patients before and after focused ultrasound sonication of the temporal lobe at intensities up to 5760 mW/cm2. Using the BrainSonix Pulsar 1002, tFUS was delivered under MR guidance, using the Siemens Magnetom 3T Prisma scanner. Neuropsychological changes were assessed using various batteries. Histological changes were assessed using hematoxylin and eosin staining, among others.ResultsWith respect to safety, the histological analysis did not reveal any detectable damage to the tissue, except for one subject for whom the histology findings were inconclusive. In addition, neuropsychological testing did not show any statistically significant changes in any test, except for a slight decrease in performance on one of the tests after tFUS.SignificanceThis study supports the hypothesis that low-intensity Transcranial Focused Ultrasound (tFUS) used for neuromodulation of brain circuits at intensities up to 5760 mW/cm2 may be safe for use in human research. However, due to methodological limitations in this study and inconclusive findings, more work is warranted to establish the safety. Future directions include greater number of sonications as well as longer exposure at higher intensity levels to further assess the safety of tFUS for modulation of neuronal circuits.