Social deprivation influences illness onset in diabetic children.

A. Franzese,G. Valerio,A. Argenziano,G. D. De Filippo,M. Iannucci,P. Buono,L. Alfonsi,A. Pisacane

IF: 8.2

1997-08-01

Diabetologia

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

A Randomized Controlled Trial Measuring Changes in Cerebral Blood Flow after Levetiracetam in Patients with Alzheimer’s Disease

Christian Sandøe Musaeus,Li Zhao,Weiying Dai,Jocelyn Breton,Mouhsin Shafi,David C. Alsop,Daniel Z. Press

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.045476

2020-01-01

Abstract:AbstractBackgroundRecent studies have shown that almost half of patients with Alzheimer’s disease demonstrate signs of epileptic activity as measured with EEG. Subclinical epileptic discharges can disrupt network activity, which is critical for long term memory. Therefore, suppressing epileptiform discharges may represent a novel therapeutic target for patients with Alzheimer’s disease. In the current randomized controlled trial, we recruited patients with mild Alzheimer’s disease and investigated the effect of a single administration of 2.5 mg/kg or 7.5 mg/kg of levetiracetam as compared with placebo on cerebral blood flow as measured with arterial spin‐labeling MRI (ASL‐MRI).MethodWe conducted a double‐blind, within‐subject crossover study in which nine participants with mild Alzheimer’s disease received placebo, 2.5 mg/kg, and 7.5 mg/kg of LEV intravenously in a randomized order across three sessions. Afterwards, participants underwent ASL‐MRI and performed a variety of neuropsychological cognitive tests. The regions with significant perfusion changes were analyzed with Statistical nonParametric Mapping (SnPM) toolbox.ResultWhen comparing 2.5 mg/kg levetiracetam with placebo, we found significant (p<0.03 with family wise error corrected at a level of 0.05) increases in relative cerebral blood flow in a cluster involving both temporal lobes, including the hippocampus, with greater involvement on the left side. We found decreases in a cluster including the posterior cingulate cortex and precuneus. No clear changes were found following the higher dose. No significant differences in cognitive performance were found between the three groups, suggesting that the intervention neither worsened nor improved cognition.ConclusionIn the current study, we found that in mild Alzheimer’s disease patients without any history of epilepsy a low dose of levetiracetam leads to changes in the cerebral blood flow in areas known to be affected early in the disease. One possible explanation could be that in mild AD, epileptic activity in the hippocampus leads to an excessive inhibition, and so relieving the inhibition with levetiracetam leads to an increased blood flow. These findings provide evidence of a potential beneficial effect of levetiracetam in patients with Alzheimer’s disease, but larger studies are needed, particularly with longer dosage schedules to determine whether there are any clinical improvements.
Safety, tolerability and efficacy outcomes of the Investigation of Levetiracetam in Alzheimer's Disease (ILiAD) trial

Arjune Sen,Sofia Toniolo,Xin You Tai,Mary Akinola,Mkael Symmonds,Sergio Mura,Joanne Galloway,Angela Hallam,Jane YC Chan,Ivan Koychev,Christopher Butler,John Geddes,Gabriel Davis Jones,Younes Tabi,Raquel Maio,Eleni Frangou,Sharon Love,Sian Thompson,Rohan Van Der Putt,Sanjay G Manohar,Rupert McShane,Masud Husain

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.05.14.24307228

2024-05-16

Abstract:Objective: To assess whether the antiseizure medication levetiracetam may improve cognition in individuals with Alzheimer's disease who have not previously experienced a seizure. Methods: We performed a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study in individuals with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease. Electroencephalography was performed at baseline and those with active epileptiform discharges were excluded. Eligible participants were randomised to placebo for 12 weeks or an active arm of oral levetiracetam (4 weeks up-titration to levetiracetam 500 mg twice daily, 4 weeks maintained on this dose followed by 4 weeks down-titration to nil). Participants then crossed over to the other arm. The primary outcome was change in cognitive function assessed by the Oxford Memory Task, a task sensitive to hippocampal memory binding. Secondary outcomes included tolerability, other neuropsychological scales and general questionnaires. Results: Recruitment numbers were severely limited owing to restrictions from the COVID-19 pandemic at the time of the study. Eight participants completed both arms of the study (mean age 68.4 years [SD=9.2]; 5 females [62.5%]). No participants withdrew from the study and there was no significant difference between reported side-effects in the active levetiracetam or placebo arm. Measures of mood and quality of life were also not significantly different between the two arms based on participant or carer reports. In limited data analysis, there was no statistically significant difference between participants in the active levetiracetam and placebo arm on the memory task. Significance: This pilot study demonstrates that levetiracetam was well tolerated in individuals with Alzheimer's disease, who do not have a history of seizures, and has no detrimental effect on mood or quality of life. Larger studies are needed to assess whether levetiracetam may have a positive effect on cognitive function in subsets of individuals with Alzheimer's disease.
Effect of Levetiracetam on Cognition in Patients With Alzheimer Disease With and Without Epileptiform Activity

Keith Vossel,Kamalini G. Ranasinghe,Alexander J. Beagle,Alice La,Kasey Ah Pook,Madelyn Castro,Danielle Mizuiri,Susanne M. Honma,Nisha Venkateswaran,Mary Koestler,Wenbo Zhang,Lennart Mucke,Michael J. Howell,Katherine L. Possin,Joel H. Kramer,Adam L. Boxer,Bruce L. Miller,Srikantan S. Nagarajan,Heidi E. Kirsch

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaneurol.2021.3310

IF: 29.907

2021-11-01

JAMA Neurology

Abstract:Question What is the effect of 4 weeks of treatment with low-dose levetiracetam on cognitive function in patients with Alzheimer disease (AD)?Findings In this randomized clinical trial of 34 adults with AD, treatment with levetiracetam did not significantly modify cognitive function. However, the treatment did improve executive function and spatial memory among participants with AD who had seizures or subclinical epileptiform activity that was identified through extended neurophysiological recordings.Meaning This study's findings indicated that extended neurophysiological assessments are important to identify patients with AD who could benefit from antiseizure approaches and that levetiracetam treatment could improve cognitive symptoms in the estimated 60% of patients with AD who have seizures and subclinical epileptiform activity.Importance Network hyperexcitability may contribute to cognitive dysfunction in patients with Alzheimer disease (AD).Objective To determine the ability of the antiseizure drug levetiracetam to improve cognition in persons with AD.Design, Setting, and Participants The Levetiracetam for Alzheimer's Disease–Associated Network Hyperexcitability (LEV-AD) study was a phase 2a randomized double-blinded placebo-controlled crossover clinical trial of 34 adults with AD that was conducted at the University of California, San Francisco, and the University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, between October 16, 2014, and July 21, 2020. Participants were adults 80 years and younger who had a Mini-Mental State Examination score of 18 points or higher and/or a Clinical Dementia Rating score of less than 2 points. Screening included overnight video electroencephalography and a 1-hour resting magnetoencephalography examination.Interventions Group A received placebo twice daily for 4 weeks followed by a 4-week washout period, then oral levetiracetam, 125 mg, twice daily for 4 weeks. Group B received treatment using the reverse sequence.Main Outcomes and Measures The primary outcome was the ability of levetiracetam treatment to improve executive function (measured by the National Institutes of Health Executive Abilities: Measures and Instruments for Neurobehavioral Evaluation and Research [NIH-EXAMINER] composite score). Secondary outcomes were cognition (measured by the Stroop Color and Word Test [Stroop] interference naming subscale and the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale–Cognitive Subscale) and disability. Exploratory outcomes included performance on a virtual route learning test and scores on cognitive and functional tests among participants with epileptiform activity.Results Of 54 adults assessed for eligibility, 11 did not meet study criteria, and 9 declined to participate. A total of 34 adults (21 women [61.8%]; mean [SD] age, 62.3 [7.7] years) with AD were enrolled and randomized (17 participants to group A and 17 participants to group B). Thirteen participants (38.2%) were categorized as having epileptiform activity. In total, 28 participants (82.4%) completed the study, 10 of whom (35.7%) had epileptiform activity. Overall, treatment with levetiracetam did not change NIH-EXAMINER composite scores (mean difference vs placebo, 0.07 points; 95% CI, −0.18 to 0.32 points; P = .55) or secondary measures. However, among participants with epileptiform activity, levetiracetam treatment improved performance on the Stroop interference naming subscale (net improvement vs placebo, 7.4 points; 95% CI, 0.2-14.7 points; P = .046) and the virtual route learning test (t = 2.36; Cohen f2 = 0.11; P = .02). There were no treatment discontinuations because of adverse events.Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized clinical trial, levetiracetam was well tolerated and, although it did not improve the primary outcome, in prespecified analysis, levetiracetam improved performance on spatial memory and executive function tasks in patients with AD and epileptiform activity. These exploratory findings warrant further assessment of antiseizure approaches in AD.Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02002819

clinical neurology
Levetiracetam Increases Hippocampal Blood Flow in Alzheimer's Disease As Measured by Arterial Spin Labelling MRI.

Daniel Zvi Press,Christian Sandoe Musaeus,Li Zhao,Jocelyn M. Breton,Mouhsin M. Shafi,Weiying Dai,David C. Alsop

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/jad-220614

2023-01-01

Journal of Alzheimer s Disease

Abstract:Background: Patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) have an increased risk of developing epileptiform discharges, which is associated with a more rapid rate of progression. This suggests that suppression of epileptiform activity could have clinical benefit in patients with AD. Objective: In the current study, we tested whether acute, intravenous administration of levetiracetam led to changes in brain perfusion as measured with arterial spin labeling MRI (ASL-MRI) in AD. Methods: We conducted a double-blind, within-subject crossover design study in which participants with mild AD (n = 9) received placebo, 2.5 mg/kg, and 7.5 mg/kg of LEV intravenously in a random order in three sessions. Afterwards, the participants underwent ASL-MRI. Results: Analysis of relative cerebral blood flow (rCBF) between 2.5 mg of levetiracetam and placebo showed significant decreases in a cluster that included the posterior cingulate cortex, the precuneus, and the posterior part of the cingulate gyrus, while increased cerebral blood flow was found in both temporal lobes involving the hippocampus. Conclusion: Administration of 2.5 mg/kg of LEV in patients without any history of epilepsy leads to changes in rCBF in areas known to be affected in the early stages of AD. These areas may be the focus of the epileptiform activity. Larger studies are needed to confirm the current findings.
Treatment of epilepsy for people with Alzheimer's disease.

Jia Liu,Lu-Ning Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011922.pub4

IF: 8.4

2021-05-13

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Abstract:Any type of seizure can be observed in Alzheimer's disease. Antiepileptic drugs seem to prevent the recurrence of epileptic seizures in most people with Alzheimer's disease. There are pharmacological and non‐pharmacological treatments for epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease, however there are no current systematic reviews to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of these treatments. This review aims to investigate these different modalities. This is an updated version of the Cochrane Review previously published in 2018. To assess the efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological or non‐pharmacological interventions for the treatment of epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease (including sporadic Alzheimer's disease and dominantly inherited Alzheimer's disease). For the latest update, on 3 August 2020 we searched the Cochrane Register of Studies (CRS Web) and MEDLINE (Ovid, 1946 to 31 July 2020). CRS Web includes randomized or quasi‐randomized controlled trials from PubMed, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and the Specialized Registers of Cochrane Review Groups, including Cochrane Epilepsy. In an effort to identify further published, unpublished and ongoing trials, we searched ongoing trials registers, reference lists and relevant conference proceedings; we also contacted trial authors and pharmaceutical companies. We included randomized and quasi‐randomized controlled trials investigating treatment for epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease, with the primary outcomes of proportion of participants with seizure freedom and proportion of participants experiencing adverse events. Two review authors independently screened the titles and abstracts of identified records, selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, cross‐checked the data for accuracy and assessed the methodological quality. We performed no meta‐analyses due to there being limited available data. We included one randomized controlled trial (RCT) on pharmacological interventions; the trial included 95 participants. No studies were found for non‐pharmacological interventions. Concerning the proportion of participants with seizure freedom, no significant differences were found for the comparisons of levetiracetam versus lamotrigine (RR) 1.20, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.71; 67 participants; very low‐certainty evidence), levetiracetam versus phenobarbital (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.19; 66 participants; very low‐certainty evidence), or lamotrigine versus phenobarbital (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.35 to 2.02; 57 participants; very low‐certainty evidence). It seemed that levetiracetam could improve cognition and lamotrigine could relieve depression, while phenobarbital and lamotrigine could worsen cognition, and levetiracetam and phenobarbital could worsen mood. The risk of bias relating to allocation, blinding and selective reporting was unclear. We judged the certainty of the evidence for all outcomes to be very low. This review does not provide sufficient evidence to support levetiracetam, phenobarbital or lamotrigine for the treatment of epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease. Regarding efficacy and tolerability, no significant differences were found between levetiracetam, phenobarbital and lamotrigine. Large RCTs with a double‐blind, parallel‐group design are required to determine the efficacy and tolerability of treatment for epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease. Background Alzheimer's disease is a risk factor for increased seizures in older people. Seizures of any type can be observed in Alzheimer's disease and are probably underestimated. Study characteristics We searched scientific databases for clinical trials comparing medication and non‐medication‐based treatments for epilepsy in people with Alzheimer's disease. We wanted to evaluate how well the treatment worked and if it had any side effects. Key results We included and analyzed one randomized controlled trial (a clinical study where people are randomly put into one or two (or more) treatment groups) with 95 participants. Concerning the proportion of participants with freedom from seizures, no significant differences were found between the antiepileptic drugs (levetiracetam versus lamotrigine, levetiracetam versus phenobarbital, and lamotrigine versus phenobarbital). It seemed that levetiracetam could improve cognition (thinking) and lamotrigine could relieve depression, while phenobarbital and lamotrigine could worsen cognition, and levetiracetam and phenobarbital could worsen mood. Certainty of the evidence The certainty of the evidence for all the outcomes from the study were very low. This means that we are very uncertain about the results and they should be interpreted with caution. Large randomized controlled trials are required to -Abstract Truncated-

medicine, general & internal
Repeated Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Improving Cognition in Patients With Alzheimer Disease: Protocol for a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Zahra Moussavi,Grant Rutherford,Brian Lithgow,Colleen Millikin,Mandana Modirrousta,Behzad Mansouri,Xikui Wang,Craig Omelan,Lesley Fellows,Paul Fitzgerald,Lisa Koski

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2196/25144

2021-01-08

JMIR Research Protocols

Abstract:Background Alzheimer disease has no known cure. As existing pharmacologic interventions only modestly slow cognitive decline, there is a need for new treatments. Recent trials of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) have reported encouraging results for improving or stabilizing cognition in patients diagnosed with Alzheimer dementia. However, owing to small samples and lack of a well-controlled double-blind design, the results to date are inconclusive. This paper presents the protocol for a large placebo-controlled double-blind study designed with sufficient statistical rigor to measure the efficacy of rTMS treatment in patients with Alzheimer dementia. Objective The objectives are to (1) recruit and enroll up to 200 eligible participants, (2) estimate the difference in treatment effects between active treatment and sham treatment, (3) estimate the difference in treatment effects between two doses of rTMS applications, (4) estimate the duration of treatment effects among responders to active rTMS treatment, and (5) estimate the effect of dementia severity on treatment outcomes among patients receiving active rTMS treatment. Methods We have designed our study to be a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial investigating the short- and long-term (up to 6 months) benefits of active rTMS treatment at two doses (10 sessions over 2 weeks and 20 sessions over 4 weeks) compared with sham rTMS treatment. The study will include patients aged ≥55 years who are diagnosed with Alzheimer disease at an early to moderate stage and have no history of seizures and no major depression. The primary outcome measure is the change in the Alzheimer Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale score from pretreatment to posttreatment. Secondary outcomes are changes in performance on tests of frontal lobe functioning (Stroop test and verbal fluency), changes in neuropsychiatric symptoms (Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire), and changes in activities of daily living (Alzheimer Disease Co-operative Study-Activities of Daily Living Inventory). Tolerability of the intervention will be assessed using a modification of the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication. We assess participants at baseline and 3, 5, 8, 16, and 24 weeks after the intervention. Results As of November 1, 2020, we have screened 523 individuals, out of which 133 were eligible and have been enrolled. Out of the 133 individuals, 104 have completed the study. Moreover, as of November 1, 2020, there has been no serious adverse event. We anticipate that rTMS will considerably improve cognitive function, with effects lasting up to 3 months. Moreover, we expect rTMS to be a well-tolerated treatment with no serious side effect. Conclusions This protocol design will allow to address both the rTMS active treatment dose and its short- and long-term effects compared with sham treatment in large samples. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02908815; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02908815 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID) DERR1-10.2196/25144
Efficacy and safety of a novel acetylcholinesterase inhibitor octohydroaminoacridine in mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease: a Phase II multicenter randomised controlled trial.

Shifu Xiao,Tao Wang,Xiuqiang Ma,Yingyi Qin,Xia Li,Zhongxin Zhao,Xueyuan Liu,Xiaoping Wang,Hengge Xie,Qinpu Jiang,Li Sun,Benyan Luo,Lan Shang,Weixian Chen,Yan Bai,Muni Tang,Maolin He,Lan Wu,Qilin Ma,Deren Hou,Jia He

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afx045

2017-01-01

Age and Ageing

Abstract:Background: inhibition of acetylcholinesterase (AChE) has been a effective treatment for Alzheimer's disease (AD). Octohydroaminoacridine, a new AChE inhibitor, is a potential treatment for AD. Method: we conducted a multicenter, randomised, double blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group Phase II clinical trial to investigate the effects of octohydroaminoacridine in patients with mild-to-moderate AD. Patients were randomised to receive placebo thrice daily, octohydroaminoacridine 1 mg/thrice daily (TID) (low-dose group), 2 mg/TID (middle-dose group) or 4 mg/TID (high-dose group). Doses in the middle-dose and high-dose group were titrated over 2-4 weeks. Changes from baseline to Week 16 were assessed with the AD Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-cog), Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change Plus (CIBIC+), activities of daily living (ADL) and the neuropsychiatric inventory (NPI). ADAS-cog was the primary end point of the study. A two-way analysis of covariance and least squares mean t-test were used. Results: at Week 16, the changes from baseline in ADAS-cog were 1.4, -2.1, -2.2 and -4.2 for placebo, low-, middle-and high-dose groups, respectively. Patients in the high-dose group had better performance in CIBIC+ and ADL scores at the end of the study. There was no significant difference in the change in NPI score among the groups. The effects of octohydroaminoacridine were dose dependent, and were effective within 16 weeks of treatment. No evidence was found for more adverse events that occurred in different drug groups than placebo group. Conclusions: octohydroaminoacridine significantly improved cognitive function and behaviour in patients with mild-to-moderate AD and this effect was dose dependent.
Pioglitazone suppresses inflammation and fibrosis in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease by down-regulating PDGF and TIMP-2: Evidence from in vitro study.

W. Deng,Z. Meng,Aitao Sun,Zhihong Yang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/CBM-170157

2017-12-06

Cancer Biomarkers

Abstract:BACKGROUND The prevalence of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) has been increasing worldwide. Pioglitazone is a pharmacologic agonist of peroxisome proliferators-activated receptor-γ (PPAR-γ) that was reported to ameliorate hepatic steatosis and inflammatory changes. OBJECTIVE We aimed to evaluate the effects of pioglitazone in NAFLD and investigate the underlying mechanism by testing platelet derived growth factor (PDGF) and tissue inhibitory of metalloproteinase-2 (TIMP-2). METHODS A total of C57BL/6 wild-type mice were randomized to three groups, control group (NC, n= 60), high-fat control group (HF, n= 60), and pioglitazone treatment group (L,n= 60). Mice were administrated with high-fat diet to construct NAFLD model. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was used to measure protein expression of PDGF and TIMP-2. Liver histology samples were stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E). RESULTS Upon pioglitazone treatment, the PDGF and TIMP-2 expression levels were decreased compared with high-fat diet-fed mice devoid of drug stimulation. Analysis of liver histology showed pioglitazone treatment could reduce steatosis and inflammatory changes, which was helpful to inhibit hepatic fibrosis in NAFLD mice. CONCLUSIONS The study showed pioglitazone might exert an inhibitory effect on hepatic inflammation and fibrosis in NAFLD. Moreover, this study provided novel evidence for the promising clinical application of pioglitazone in intervening NAFLD.
Levetiracetam modulates brain metabolic networks and transcriptomic signatures in the 5XFAD mouse model of Alzheimer's disease

Charles P. Burton,Evgeny J. Chumin,Alyssa Y. Collins,Scott A. Persohn,Kristen D. Onos,Ravi S. Pandey,Sara K. Quinney,Paul R. Territo

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2023.1336026

IF: 4.3

2024-01-24

Frontiers in Neuroscience

Abstract:Introduction: Subcritical epileptiform activity is associated with impaired cognitive function and is commonly seen in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). The anti-convulsant, levetiracetam (LEV), is currently being evaluated in clinical trials for its ability to reduce epileptiform activity and improve cognitive function in AD. The purpose of the current study was to apply pharmacokinetics (PK), network analysis of medical imaging, gene transcriptomics, and PK/PD modeling to a cohort of amyloidogenic mice to establish how LEV restores or drives alterations in the brain networks of mice in a dose-dependent basis using the rigorous preclinical pipeline of the MODEL-AD Preclinical Testing Core. Methods: Chronic LEV was administered to 5XFAD mice of both sexes for 3 months based on allometrically scaled clinical dose levels from PK models. Data collection and analysis consisted of a multi-modal approach utilizing 18 F-FDG PET/MRI imaging and analysis, transcriptomic analyses, and PK/PD modeling. Results: Pharmacokinetics of LEV showed a sex and dose dependence in C max , CL/F, and AUC 0-∞ , with simulations used to estimate dose regimens. Chronic dosing at 10, 30, and 56 mg/kg, showed 18 F-FDG specific regional differences in brain uptake, and in whole brain covariance measures such as clustering coefficient, degree, network density, and connection strength (i.e., positive and negative). In addition, transcriptomic analysis via nanoString showed dose-dependent changes in gene expression in pathways consistent 18 F-FDG uptake and network changes, and PK/PD modeling showed a concentration dependence for key genes, but not for network covariance modeling. Discussion: This study represents the first report detailing the relationships of metabolic covariance and transcriptomic network changes resulting from LEV administration in 5XFAD mice. Overall, our results highlight non-linear kinetics based on dose and sex, where gene expression analysis demonstrated LEV dose- and concentration-dependent changes, along with cerebral metabolism, and/or cerebral homeostatic mechanisms relevant to human AD, which aligned closely with network covariance analysis of 18 F-FDG images. Collectively, this study show cases the value of a multimodal connectomic, transcriptomic, and pharmacokinetic approach to further investigate dose dependent relationships in preclinical studies, with translational value toward informing clinical study design.

neurosciences
Be a PEACH and Hand Me That Levetiracetam: Seizure Prophylaxis for Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage

Mackenzie C. Cervenka

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/15357597231174112

2023-05-16

Epilepsy Currents

Abstract:Epilepsy Currents, Ahead of Print. Safety and Efficacy of Prophylactic Levetiracetam for Prevention of Epileptic Seizures in the Acute Phase of Intracerebral Haemorrhage (PEACH): A Randomised, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase 3 Trial Peter-Derex L, Philippeau F, Garnier P, André-Obadia N, Boulogne S, Catenoix H, Convers P, Mazzola L, Gouttard M, Esteban M, Fontaine J, Mechtouff L, Ong E, Cho T-H, Nighoghossian N, Perreton N, Termoz A, Haesebaert J, Schott A-M, Rabilloud M, Pivot C, Dhelens C, Filip A, Berthezène Y, Rheims S, Boutitie F, Derex L. Lancet Neurol. 2022;21(9):781-791. doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(22)00235-6 Background:The incidence of early seizures (occurring within 7 days of stroke onset) after intracerebral haemorrhage reaches 30% when subclinical seizures are diagnosed by continuous EEG. Early seizures might be associated with haematoma expansion and worse neurological outcomes. Current guidelines do not recommend prophylactic antiseizure treatment in this setting. We aimed to assess whether prophylactic levetiracetam would reduce the risk of acute seizures in patients with intracerebral haemorrhage.Methods:The double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 PEACH trial was conducted at three stroke units in France. Patients (aged 18 years or older) who presented with a non-traumatic intracerebral haemorrhage within 24 h after onset were randomly assigned (1:1) to levetiracetam (intravenous 500 mg every 12 h) or matching placebo. Randomisation was done with a web-based system and stratified by centre and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score at baseline. Treatment was continued for 6 weeks. Continuous EEG was started within 24 h after inclusion and recorded over 48 h. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of at least one clinical seizure within 72 h of inclusion or at least one electrographic seizure recorded on continuous EEG, analysed in the modified intention-to-treat population, which comprised all patients who were randomly assigned to treatment and who had a continuous EEG performed. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02631759, and is now closed. Recruitment was prematurely stopped after 48% of the recruitment target was reached due to a low recruitment rate and cessation of funding. Findings Between June 1, 2017, and April 14, 2020, 50 patients with mild-to-moderate severity intracerebral haemorrhage were included: 24 were assigned to levetiracetam and 26 to placebo. During the first 72 h, a clinical or electrographic seizure was observed in three (16%) of 19 patients in the levetiracetam group versus ten (43%) of 23 patients in the placebo group (odds ratio 0.16, 95% CI 0.03–0.94, p = 0.043). All seizures in the first 72 h were electrographic seizures only. No difference in depression or anxiety reporting was observed between the groups at 1 month or 3 months. Depression was recorded in three (13%) patients who received levetiracetam versus four (15%) patients who received placebo, and anxiety was reported for two (8%) patients versus one (4%) patient. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events in the levetiracetam group versus the placebo group were headache (nine [39%] vs six [24%]), pain (three [13%] vs ten [40%]), and falls (seven [30%] vs four [16%]). The most frequent serious adverse events were neurological deterioration due to the intracerebral haemorrhage (one [4%] vs four [16%]) and severe pneumonia (two [9%] vs two [8%]). No treatment-related death was reported in either group.Interpretation:Levetiracetam might be effective in preventing acute seizures in intracerebral haemorrhage. Larger studies are needed to determine whether seizure prophylaxis improves functional outcome in patients with intracerebral haemorrhage.

clinical neurology
Levetiracetam Administration is Correlated with Lower Mortality in Patients with Mitochondrial Encephalomyopathy, Lactic Acidosis, and Stroke-Like Episodes: a Retrospective Study

Zhe Zhang,Dan-Hua Zhao,Xu-Tong Zhao,Xiao Zhang,Hui Xiong,Xin-Hua Bao,Yun Yuan,Zhao-Xia Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/cm9.0000000000000061

IF: 6.133

2019-01-01

Chinese Medical Journal

Abstract:Background: Studies on the relationship between antiepileptic drug (AED) administration and clinical outcomes in patients with mitochondrial encephalomyopathy, lactic acidosis, and stroke-like episodes (MELAS) remain scarce. Levetiracetam (LEV) is an AED that is neuroprotective in various neurologic disorders. This study aimed to determine the impact of LEV on the outcome of MELAS. Methods: A retrospective, single-center study was performed based on a large cohort of patients with MELAS with a history of seizures (n=102). Decisions on antiepileptic therapies were made empirically. Patients were followed up for 1 to 8 years (median, 4 years) and divided into 2 groups based on whether LEV was administered (LEV or non-LEV). The modified Rankin scale (mRS) scores and mortality risks were analyzed in all patients. Results: LEV, carbamazepine, benzodiazepines, topiramate, oxcarbazepine, valproate, and lamotrigine were administered in 48, 37, 18, 13, 11, 9, and 9 patients, singly or in combination, respectively. The mean mRS score of the LEV group (n=48) was lower than that of the non-LEV group (n=54; mean +standard deviation, 2.79 +/- 1.47 vs. 3.83 +/- 1.93, P=0.006) up to the end of the study. Nevertheless, there was no difference in the proportion of subjects without disability (mRS ranging 0-1) between the groups (P = 0.37). The multivariate regressions revealed that LEV treatment was associated with lower mRS scores (odds ratio 0.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15-0.68, P=0.003) and mortality rates (hazard ratio 0.24, 95% CI 0.08-0.74, P=0.013). There was a significant difference in the Kaplan-Meier survival curves between the groups (chi(2) =4.29, P=0.04). Conclusions: The LEV administration is associated with lower mortality in patients with MELAS in this retrospective study. Further laboratory research and prospective cohort studies are needed to confirm whether LEV has neuroprotective effects on patients with mitochondria' diseases.
Complete genome sequence of Paenibacillus beijingensis 7188(T) (=DSM 24997(T)), a novel rhizobacterium from jujube garden soil.

Yunyoung Kwak,Jae-Ho Shin

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiotec.2015.04.015

IF: 3.595

2015-07-20

Journal of Biotechnology

Abstract:
Assessing the Incidence Rate of Neuropsychiatric Adverse Effects in Older Adults Following Levetiracetam Initiation: A Retrospective Study

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2147/ijgm.s458803

IF: 2.145

2024-05-08

International Journal of General Medicine

Abstract:Mazen A Basheikh 1, 2 1 Department of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Jeddah, Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; 2 Faculty of Medicine, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Correspondence: Mazen A Basheikh, Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Jeddah, Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Tel +966504325067, Email Background: Levetiracetam (LEV) is commonly prescribed for epilepsy management. However, neuropsychiatric disorders (NPDs) are concerning adverse effects that may result in medication discontinuation. This study aims to examine the incidence and factors influencing LEV associated NPDs in adult patients aged 50 years and above. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients aged 50 years and above prescribed LEV between 2010 and 2020, with at least one follow-up appointment six months post-treatment initiation. The incidence of new-onset or aggravated NPDs and variables potentially influencing this risk were examined. Independent t -test, chi-squared, and Fisher's exact test were used, in addition to univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Results: The study included 100 patients with a mean age at LEV start of 63.31 years (SD = 16.48). Neuropsychiatric symptoms were observed in 6 (6.0%) patients. Factors associated with new-onset NPDs were younger age at epilepsy diagnosis (p=0.005), younger age at LEV start (p=0.004), and concurrent use of Carbamazepine/Oxcarbazepine (p=0.004). On multivariate analysis, only the association with Carbamazepine/Oxcarbazepine remained significant (OR 14.62, 95% CI 1.86– 114.70, p=0.011). Conclusion: The findings indicate that the incidence of NPDs in elderly patients is relatively low (6%). Further research with larger samples is needed in comparison with a younger sample as a control group to confirm these findings. Keywords: levetiracetam, neuropsychiatric disorders, elderly patients Epilepsy is a common neurological disorder characterized by a sustained propensity to generate epileptic seizures, leading to a spectrum of cognitive, psychological, and social repercussions. It manifests with transient motor (the most frequent), sensory, sensitive, autonomic, or cognitive symptoms originating from abnormal excessive or synchronous neuronal activity within the brain that results from an imbalance between excitation and inhibition of neuronal circuits. 1 According to the WHO, it is estimated that 5 million people are diagnosed with epilepsy every year worldwide, with about 80% of epileptic patients living in low- and middle-income countries. 2 Nonetheless, the availability of effective antiseizure agents considerably reduced the burden of this disorder, as over 70% of the affected individuals can live seizure-free if properly diagnosed and treated. 2 Levetiracetam (LEV), a pyrrolidone derivative developed from piracetam, is among the first-line medications for epilepsy. It has demonstrated tolerability and effectiveness against both focal and generalized seizures in children and adults. 3,4 The pharmacological effects of LEV are attributed to its modulation of neuronal activity through various mechanisms. It binds to the synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A), a glycoprotein essential for presynaptic neurotransmission present mainly in the cortex, thalamus, basal ganglia, and hippocampus, leading to a decreased seizure threshold in epileptogenic brain areas. 5 Furthermore, LEV has additional potential antiseizure effects. It increases the levels of the inhibitory neurotransmitter GABA and neurosteroids such as allopregnanolone, while decreasing excitatory glutamate. It also modulates serotonergic, α2-adrenergic, and μ-opioid receptor-mediated signaling, and reduces intraneuronal calcium levels. 6,7 However, these effects of LEV can result in secondary interference with other neurological functions such as mood and behavior regulation, ultimately leading to neuropsychiatric disorders (NPDs). 6 A case–control study involving 841 patients with a mean age of 44.7 years old showed that LEV therapy was independently associated with greater frequency of anger/aggression, nervousness/agitation, depression, and sleep disturbance, compared to other treatments. 8 In another large case–control study of 4085 epilepsy patients (mean age: 41 years), LEV displayed the highest rates of psychiatric adverse events compared to the other antiseizure medications (ASMs). These effects resulted in higher intolerability rate of 17.7%, a dose reduction rate of 9.8% and complete cessation rate of 8.3%. 3 Moreover, previous systematic reviews of safety revealed that following LEV therapy, the inciden -Abstract Truncated-

medicine, general & internal
Common sense, dollars and cents, and drug-eluting stents.

P. Vaitkus

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JACC.2006.04.030

IF: 24

2006-07-18

Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Abstract:
Multicenter Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Levetiracetam As Add-on Therapy in Patients with Refractor Partial Seizures

Xun-Yi Wu,Zhen Hong,Xun Wu,Li-Wen Wu,Xue-Feng Wang,Dong Zhou,Zhong-Xin Zhao,Chuan-Zhen Lv

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1528-1167.2008.01729.x

2007-01-01

Abstract:SummaryPurpose: To evaluate efficacy and tolerability of levetiracetam (LEV; Keppra®) as add‐on therapy in Chinese patients with refractory partial‐onset seizures.Methods: In this multicenter, double‐blind, randomized, placebo‐controlled trial, 206 patients aged 16–70 years with uncontrolled partial‐onset seizures were randomized to receive LEV (n =103) or placebo (n =103); 202 patients (LEV, n =102; placebo, n = 100) comprised the intent‐to‐treat population. An 8‐week historical baseline period confirmed eligibility according to seizure count. The 16‐week treatment period consisted of a 4‐week up‐titration period (LEV, 1,000–3,000 mg/day in two equal divided doses) followed by a 12‐week maintenance period. Efficacy assessments were based on weekly frequency of partial‐onset seizures during the 16‐week treatment period.Results: LEV significantly decreased weekly partial‐onset seizure frequency over placebo by 26.8% (p < 0.001). Median percentage reductions in weekly partial‐onset seizure frequency from historical baseline were 55.9% for LEV and 13.7% for placebo (p < 0.001). The ≥50% responder rates were 55.9% for LEV, compared with 26.0% for placebo (p < 0.001). Freedom from partial‐onset seizures during treatment period was achieved by 11 LEV patients (10.8%) and 2 placebo patients (2.0%) (p = 0.012). Adverse events were reported by 65 LEV‐treated patients (63.1%) and 62 placebo‐treated patients (60.2%); most were of mild‐to‐moderate intensity. The most common adverse events were somnolence (LEV, 17.5%; placebo, 17.5%), decreased platelet count (LEV, 9.7%; placebo, 9.7%), and dizziness (LEV, 7.8%; placebo, 13.6%).Discussion: Add‐on LEV was effective and well‐tolerated in Chinese patients with refractory partial‐onset seizures.
Optical transversal filters

R. Minasian

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/LEOSST.2005.1528040

2005-07-25

Abstract:Recent new methods for photonic signal processing of microwave signals, based on optical delay line structures are described, including novel coherence-free notch filters, and new structures using grating synthesis techniques for multiple wavelength processors.
Thoracic cordotomy under epidural block anesthesia.

F. Murtagh,L. W. Krumperman,M. R. Wester

Abstract:
Assessment of levetiracetam bioavailability from targeted sites in the human intestine using remotely activated capsules and gamma scintigraphy: Open-label, single-dose, randomized, four-way crossover study in healthy male volunteers

Armel Stockis,Maria Laura Sargentini-Maier,Christian Otoul,Alyson Connor,Ian Wilding,Heather Wray

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2010.09.001

Abstract:Background: Levetiracetam is a broad-spectrum antiepileptic drug that binds to synaptic vesicle protein SV2A. Levetiracetam is indicated in the adjunctive treatment of partial-onset seizures, myoclonic seizures, and generalized tonic-clonic seizures. It is also approved in Europe as monotherapy for newly diagnosed partial-onset seizures. A Phase I clinical pharmacology trial was conducted during preregistration clinical development to better understand the regional gastrointestinal (GI) absorption of levetiracetam. Objective: This study evaluated the relative bioavailability of levetiracetam in various regions of the GI tract using a noninvasive, remote-controlled capsule device providing targeted drug delivery, relative to that after oral administration, and explored the drug's absorption characteristics in healthy volunteers. Methods: Pharmacokinetic data were obtained from healthy men aged 18 to 65 years in an open-label, single-dose, randomized, 4-way crossover study. Treatments included levetiracetam 250 mg administered as an immediate-release tablet and capsule delivery of 250 mg drug substance (levetiracetam powder without excipients) to the proximal small bowel, distal small bowel, and ascending colon. The location of the capsule in the GI tract was monitored using γ-scintigraphic imaging. Blood samples for plasma levetiracetam concentration were collected before dosing; at 10, 20, 30, and 45 minutes; and at 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 6, 9, 12, 16, 20, and 24 hours after tablet intake or after capsule activation. Pharmacokinetic parameters C(max), T(max), AUC₀₋(last), AUC₀₋(∞) and t(½) were calculated using noncompartmental methods. Tolerability was determined using clinical assessment, monitoring of vital signs, laboratory analysis, and interviews with the volunteers regarding adverse events. Results: Nine healthy men, 7 whites and 2 Asians, were enrolled (mean [SD] age, 31 [14] years; weight, 77 [5] kg; height, 176 [6] cm). Six volunteers completed all 4 treatments. Seven adverse events (headache [3], lethargy [2], tachycardia [1], and contusion [1]) were reported in 5 volunteers, but only 2 (headache and lethargy) were judged by the investigator to be possibly drug related. The geometric mean (%CV) AUC(0-last) values of levetiracetam delivered in the proximal small bowel, distal small bowel, ascending colon, and stomach (oral tablet) were 58.2 (9.3%), 59.6 (8.9%), 51.5 (12.0%), and 59.0 (7.4%) μg · h/mL, respectively. Values for bioavailability in the proximal small bowel, distal small bowel, and ascending colon relative to the tablet were 98.5% (95% CI, 89.7%-108.2%), 100.8% (95% CI, 91.4%-111.1%), and 87.1% (95% CI, 77.9%-97.5%). Conclusion: After delivery in the proximal small bowel, distal small bowel, or ascending colon, the systemic bioavailability of levetiracetam (AUC), but not C(max) and T(max), appeared comparable to that after oral administration and thus appeared site independent in this small group of healthy fasting men.
Adjunctive brivaracetam for uncontrolled focal and generalized epilepsies: results of a phase III, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, flexible-dose trial

Patrick Kwan,Eugen Trinka,Wim Van Paesschen,Ivan Rektor,Martin E Johnson,Sarah Lu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/epi.12391

IF: 6.74

Epilepsia

Abstract:Purpose: To evaluate the safety and tolerability of adjunctive brivaracetam (BRV), a high-affinity synaptic vesicle protein 2A (SV2A) ligand, in adults with uncontrolled epilepsy. Efficacy was also assessed in patients with focal seizures as a secondary objective, and explored by descriptive analysis in patients with generalized seizures. Methods: This was a phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled flexible dose trial (N01254/NCT00504881) in adults (16-70 years) with uncontrolled epilepsy (up to 20% could be patients with generalized epilepsy). After a prospective 4-week baseline, patients were randomized (3:1) to b.i.d. BRV or PBO, initiated at 20 mg/day and increased, as needed, to 150 mg/day during an 8-week dose-finding period. This was followed by an 8-week stable-dose maintenance period. The treatment period comprised the dose-finding period plus the maintenance period (16 weeks). Key findings: A total of 480 patients were randomized (BRV 359, PBO 121); of these, 431 had focal epilepsy and 49 had generalized epilepsy. Ninety percent BRV- and 91.7% PBO-treated patients completed the study. Similar proportions of patients (BRV 66.0%, PBO 65.3%) reported adverse events (AEs) during the treatment period. AEs led to treatment discontinuation in 6.1% and 5.0% of BRV- and PBO-treated patients, respectively. The incidence of AEs declined from the dose-finding (BRV 56.0%, PBO 55.4%) to the maintenance (BRV 36.8%, PBO 40.9%) period. The most frequent AEs during the treatment period were headache (BRV 14.2% vs. PBO 19.8%), somnolence (BRV 11.1% vs. PBO 4.1%), and dizziness (BRV 8.6% vs. PBO 5.8%). The incidence of psychiatric AEs was similar for BRV and PBO (BRV 12.3%, PBO 11.6%). In patients with focal seizures, the baseline-adjusted percent reduction in seizure frequency/week in the BRV group (n = 323) over PBO (n = 108) was 7.3% (p = 0.125) during the treatment period. The median percent reduction in baseline-adjusted seizure frequency/week was 26.9% BRV versus 18.9% PBO (p = 0.070), and the ≥50% responder rate was 30.3% BRV versus 16.7% PBO (p = 0.006). In patients with generalized seizures only, the number of seizure days/week decreased from 1.42 at baseline to 0.63 during the treatment period in BRV-treated patients (n = 36), and from 1.47 at baseline to 1.26 during the treatment period in PBO-treated patients (n = 13). The median percent reduction from baseline in generalized seizure days/week was 42.6% versus 20.7%, and the ≥50% responder rate was 44.4% versus 15.4% in BRV-treated and PBO-treated patients, respectively. Significance: Adjunctive BRV given at individualized tailored doses (20-150 mg/day) was well tolerated in adults with uncontrolled epilepsy, and our results provided support for further evaluation of efficacy in reducing focal and generalized seizures.
Development of some Models for Assessment the Dynamic Migration Processes of Phosphates in Soil Columns

O. D. Orbuleț,T. Căsăndroiu,G. Voicu,A. Miron,C. Modrogan

2012-12-18

Abstract:SummaryDue to complexity of phosphate (P) migration in soil columns, the problem of theoretical approach of modeling the process is specialy diffi cult. So, numerous semi-empirical models based on admission of simplifying assumptions were developed, some of them being apart from the real phenomenon. In this paper are presented the breakthrough curves, the phosphate (P) usage degree in soil, based on a dynamic study, realised in order to determine phosphate sorption rate on the granules of two soil types (cambic chernozem and psamosoil) from Romania. Due to random character of the process, which is influenced by many naturally variable factors, this can be addressed from stochastic point of view. Experimental data regarding phosphate migration in soil column evolution process are represented like curves with sigmoid profi le. Based on this observation, Rosin-Rammler and Schuhman sigmoid profi le curves, known models and logistic type equations were used as simulation models representing phosphate transport and sorption kinetics for laboratory experiments in columns. Testing the models with the experimental data resulted with the conclusion that the most appropriate models describing the process of phosphate migration in soil columns are Rosin-Rammler and logistic type equation, C = 1-exp(-bt

Social deprivation influences illness onset in diabetic children.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Measuring Changes in Cerebral Blood Flow after Levetiracetam in Patients with Alzheimer’s Disease

Safety, tolerability and efficacy outcomes of the Investigation of Levetiracetam in Alzheimer's Disease (ILiAD) trial

Effect of Levetiracetam on Cognition in Patients With Alzheimer Disease With and Without Epileptiform Activity

Levetiracetam Increases Hippocampal Blood Flow in Alzheimer's Disease As Measured by Arterial Spin Labelling MRI.

Treatment of epilepsy for people with Alzheimer's disease.

Repeated Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Improving Cognition in Patients With Alzheimer Disease: Protocol for a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

Efficacy and safety of a novel acetylcholinesterase inhibitor octohydroaminoacridine in mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease: a Phase II multicenter randomised controlled trial.

Pioglitazone suppresses inflammation and fibrosis in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease by down-regulating PDGF and TIMP-2: Evidence from in vitro study.

Levetiracetam modulates brain metabolic networks and transcriptomic signatures in the 5XFAD mouse model of Alzheimer's disease

Be a PEACH and Hand Me That Levetiracetam: Seizure Prophylaxis for Spontaneous Intracerebral Hemorrhage

Levetiracetam Administration is Correlated with Lower Mortality in Patients with Mitochondrial Encephalomyopathy, Lactic Acidosis, and Stroke-Like Episodes: a Retrospective Study

Complete genome sequence of Paenibacillus beijingensis 7188(T) (=DSM 24997(T)), a novel rhizobacterium from jujube garden soil.

Assessing the Incidence Rate of Neuropsychiatric Adverse Effects in Older Adults Following Levetiracetam Initiation: A Retrospective Study

Common sense, dollars and cents, and drug-eluting stents.

Multicenter Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Levetiracetam As Add-on Therapy in Patients with Refractor Partial Seizures

Optical transversal filters

Thoracic cordotomy under epidural block anesthesia.

Assessment of levetiracetam bioavailability from targeted sites in the human intestine using remotely activated capsules and gamma scintigraphy: Open-label, single-dose, randomized, four-way crossover study in healthy male volunteers

Adjunctive brivaracetam for uncontrolled focal and generalized epilepsies: results of a phase III, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, flexible-dose trial

Development of some Models for Assessment the Dynamic Migration Processes of Phosphates in Soil Columns