Search

James W Wheless,1 Danielle A Becker,2 Selim R Benbadis,3 Vinay Puri,4 Proleta Datta,5 Dave Clarke,6 Deepa Panjeti-Moore,7 Enrique Carrazana,8,9 Adrian L Rabinowicz8,10 1Le Bonheur Children’s Hospital, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA; 2Department of Neurology, Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH, USA; 3Comprehensive Epilepsy Program, University of South Florida & Tampa General Hospital, Tampa, FL, USA; 4Norton Children’s Neuroscience Institute, Affiliated with University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA; 5Department of Neurology, School of Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA; 6Dell Children’s Comprehensive Pediatric Epilepsy Center, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA; 7Epilepsy Program; Neurology Consultants of Dallas, Dallas, TX, USA; 8Clinical Development and Medical Affairs, Neurelis, Inc., San Diego, CA, USA; 9Department of Family Medicine, John A. Burns School of Medicine, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI, USA; 10Center for Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, Charles E. Schmidt College of Science, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL, USACorrespondence: James W Wheless, Le Bonheur Children’s Hospital, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, 777 Washington Avenue, Suite 335, Memphis, TN, 38105, USA, Tel +1 901.287.5207, Fax +1 901.287.5325, Email jwheless@uthsc.eduAbstract: Some patients with epilepsy continue to have seizures despite daily treatment with antiseizure medications. This includes seizure clusters (also known as acute repetitive seizures), which are an increase in seizure frequency that is different from the usual seizure pattern for that patient. In the literature, the term “rescue” is used for pharmacologic treatment for seizure clusters, but clarity regarding timing or whether a caregiver or patient should wait until a moment of life-threatening urgency before administering the medication is lacking. Additionally, the concept of waiting 5 minutes to identify and initiate treatment of status epilepticus has been carried over to the treatment of seizure clusters, as well as the idea of waiting owing to safety concerns, without reevaluation in the context of the reported safety profiles for currently available as-needed therapies when administered as prescribed. Delaying treatment of seizure clusters may have negative outcomes, including injury, emergency room use, hospitalization, and progression to status epilepticus. Additionally, increased time for administration of benzodiazepines, the cornerstone therapies for seizure clusters, may lower the potency and effectiveness once administration takes place, because of physiologic changes. Thus, clarifying the importance of timing in the treatment terminology may be of benefit in the acute context. The term “immediate-use seizure medication” (ISM), meaning treatment that is administered as quickly as possible once a seizure cluster is recognized, may help to clarify the timing of as-needed treatment. This review examines the recognition and definitions of seizure clusters, the physiologic rationale for ISM for seizure clusters, and the effectiveness and safety of early treatment. Remaining knowledge gaps are also discussed. The findings of this review suggest that it may be time to revisit the terminology of “rescue”, which implies waiting to administer treatment for seizure clusters, as doing so is not supported by pathophysiologic, effectiveness, or safety data.Plain Language Summary: Some people with epilepsy have seizures even if they take daily medication for their seizures. If they have more seizures than usual in a day, this may be called a seizure cluster. Drugs used to treat clusters are often said to be “rescue” medicines. But the word “rescue” may imply that the medication should only be administered when serious danger is present. Additionally, possibly because of previous instructions, people may think they have to wait to see if the seizure lasts more than 5 minutes to give the medicine, or they may be concerned about how safe the medicine will be if they give it. This older approach needs to be revisited and replaced. Waiting to give medicine could make it more likely that a person could get hurt or require a hospital or emergency room visit or their seizure condition could worsen. Waiting also may allow for changes in the body that may make a medicine less effective once it is given. Because of this, it may be better to say these medicines are for “immediate use” rather than for “rescue”. That way, the people giving the medicine know that they should give it as soon as they see the patient needs it. This paper discusses how seizure clusters are described and what can happen if someone waits to give medicine versus giving it right away. The paper shows that waiting may not be needed.Keywords: benzodiazepine, early intervention, epilepsy, rescue therapy

Abstract Sex differences in drug pharmacokinetics include variations in the expression of the cytochrome P450 enzymes, which are involved in the metabolism of benzodiazepines. It is unclear whether sex influences outcomes associated with intranasally administered drugs. A post hoc analysis of sex differences was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of diazepam nasal spray, which included examining changes in the number of days between seizure clusters over time (SEIzure interVAL [SEIVAL]). Diazepam nasal spray is approved for acute treatment of seizure clusters in patients with epilepsy aged ≥6 years. Data from a phase 3 safety study were used to determine the proportion of second doses used within 24 h (ie, a proxy for effectiveness) and SEIVAL. Adverse events were recorded. Of 163 treated patients, 89 were female, and 74 were male. Approximately 16% of both sexes self‐administered the study drug. A slightly higher proportion of seizure clusters was treated with a second dose in female (14.7%) than male (9.4%) patients. SEIVAL increased significantly and substantially over a year for all patients. The safety profile was generally similar between the sexes. These results suggest that potential sex differences in benzodiazepine pharmacokinetics do not meaningfully influence outcomes associated with diazepam nasal spray. Plain Language Summary Some drugs may have differences in absorption and metabolism between genders that could translate into differences in safety and effectiveness. This safety study looked at diazepam nasal spray for treating seizure clusters in patients at least 6 years old. It found that safety was about the same for females and males. For both groups, most clusters stopped after only 1 dose of the drug, and the time between treated clusters got longer over a year.

Abstract Objective Double‐blind, randomized, and placebo‐controlled trial SP0967 (NCT02477839/2013‐000717‐20) did not demonstrate superior efficacy of lacosamide versus placebo in patients aged ≥1 month to

IntroductionNeurologic circadian influences, including sleep/wake transitions, processes (e.g., hormonal variation), and behavioral patterns (e.g., consumption of food and oral medications), may affect seizure patterns. Specific circadian patterns of seizures have been reported depending on type, onset location, and severity; however, data on patterns for patients with seizure clusters and effectiveness of rescue therapy by time of day are limited.MethodsWe conducted post hoc analyses using patient diary data from the phase 3 safety study of diazepam nasal spray, which is indicated for acute treatment of seizure clusters in patients with epilepsy aged ≥6 years. Patients were administered age- and weight-based doses; second doses could be administered if needed to control a seizure cluster. We assessed clock timing of seizure-cluster onset along with second-dose use as a proxy for effectiveness. Treatment-emergent adverse events were recorded.ResultsSeizure-cluster onset was observed to be generally highest during mornings and late evenings and lowest in the early evening and middle of the night. Second-dose use was not consistently associated with a specific time of day. The safety profile was consistent with that expected from previous studies of diazepam nasal spray.ConclusionThese results suggest that diazepam nasal spray can be effectively administered at any time of day.

Abstract Epilepsy is a common neurological disorder in the United States, affecting approximately 1.2% of the population. Some people with epilepsy may experience seizure clusters, which are acute repetitive seizures that differ from the person’s usual seizure pattern. Seizure clusters are unpredictable, are emotionally burdensome to patients and caregivers (including care partners), and require prompt treatment to prevent progression to serious outcomes, including status epilepticus and associated morbidity (e.g., lacerations, fractures due to falls) and mortality. Rescue medications for community use can be administered to terminate a seizure cluster, and benzodiazepines are the cornerstone of rescue treatment. Despite the effectiveness of benzodiazepines and the importance of a rapid treatment approach, as many as 80% of adult patients do not use rescue medication to treat seizure clusters. This narrative review provides an update on rescue medications used for treatment of seizure clusters, with an emphasis on clinical development and study programs for diazepam rectal gel, midazolam nasal spray, and diazepam nasal spray. Results from long-term clinical trials have shown that treatments for seizure clusters are effective. Intranasal benzodiazepines provide ease of use and patient and caregiver satisfaction in pediatric and adult patients. Adverse events attributed to acute rescue treatments have been characterized as mild to moderate, and no reports of respiratory depression have been attributed to treatment in long-term safety studies. The implementation of an acute seizure action plan to facilitate optimal use of rescue medications provides an opportunity for improved management of seizure clusters, allowing those affected to resume normal daily activities more quickly.

For acute treatment of seizure clusters in patients with epilepsy, intranasal administration of acute seizure therapies has been shown to provide accessibility and ease of use to care partners as well as the potential for self-administration by patients. Diazepam nasal spray (Valtoco®) was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for acute treatment of intermittent, stereotypic episodes of frequent seizure activity (ie, seizure clusters, acute repetitive seizures) in patients with epilepsy aged ≥6 years. Self-administration consistent with the prescribing information is feasible and was reported by a subgroup of patients (n = 27 of 163) in a long-term phase 3 safety study. Data regarding self-administration among these patients with seizure clusters are examined here to explore the safety profiles and measures of effectiveness, as well as the quality of life of those who self-treated. In addition, this focused look at patients who self-administered diazepam nasal spray may offer some insights into the characteristics of patients who may be appropriate for self-administration.

Non-invasive methods such as Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS) and magnetoencephalography (MEG) aid in the pre-surgical evaluation of patients with epilepsy or brain tumor to identify sensorimotor cortices. MEG requires sedation in children or patients with developmental delay. However, TMS can be applied to awake patients of all ages with any cognitive abilities. In this study, we compared the efficacy of TMS with MEG (in awake and sedated states) in identifying the hand sensorimotor areas in patients with epilepsy or brain tumors. We identified 153 patients who underwent awake- (n = 98) or sedated-MEG (n = 55), along with awake TMS for hand sensorimotor mapping as part of their pre-surgical evaluation. TMS involved stimulating the precentral gyrus and recording electromyography responses, while MEG identified the somatosensory cortex during median nerve stimulation. Awake-MEG had a success rate of 92.35 % and TMS had 99.49 % (p-value = 0.5517). However, in the sedated-MEG cohort, TMS success rate of 95.61 % was significantly higher compared to MEG’s 58.77 % (p-value = 0.0001). Factors affecting mapping success were analyzed. Logistic regression across the entire cohort identified patient sedation as the lone significant predictor, contrary to age, lesion, metal, and number of antiseizure medications (ASMs). A subsequent analysis replaced sedation with anesthetic drug dosage, revealing no significant predictors impacting somatosensory mapping success under sedation. This study yields insights into the utility of TMS and MEG in mapping hand sensorimotor cortices and underscores the importance of considering factors that influence eloquent cortex mapping limitations during sedation.

Determination of language hemispheric dominance (HD) in patients undergoing evaluation for epilepsy surgery has traditionally relied on the sodium amobarbital (Wada) test. The emergence of non-invasive methods for determining language laterality has increasingly shown to be a viable alternative. In this study, we assessed the efficacy of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and magnetoencephalography (MEG), compared to the Wada test, in determining language HD in a sample of 12 patients. TMS-induced speech errors were classified as speech arrest, semantic, or performance errors, and the HD was based on the total number of errors in each hemisphere with equal weighting of all errors (classic) and with a higher weighting of speech arrests and semantic errors (weighted). Using MEG, HD for language was based on the spatial extent of long-latency activity sources localized to receptive language regions. Based on the classic and weighted language laterality index (LI) in 12 patients, TMS was concordant with the Wada in 58.33% and 66.67% of patients, respectively. In eight patients, MEG language mapping was deemed conclusive, with a concordance rate of 75% with the Wada test. Our results indicate that TMS and MEG have moderate and strong agreement, respectively, with the Wada test, suggesting they could be used as non-invasive substitutes.