Objectives: Secondary generalized tonic-clonic seizures (SGTCS) are among the most severe forms of seizures, and the main risk factor for sudden unexpected death in epilepsy (SUDEP). Whether some antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) might be more efficacious than others on SGTCS in patients with drug-resistant focal epilepsy thus represents an important clinical issue for which no data are currently available.
Methods: We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of adjunctive AED in which information on efficacy outcomes (i.e., responder rate and/or frequency per 28 days relative to baseline) were available both for all seizure types and for SGTCS. The primary analysis evaluated the efficacy of AEDs on all types of seizure and on SGTCS by comparing the responder rates for AED and for placebo.
Results: Responder rate was available both for all seizure types and for SGTCS in 13 of the 72 eligible trials, evaluating 7 AEDs. Only three AEDs--lacosamide, perampanel and topiramate--showed greater efficacy than placebo. However, confidence intervals of relative risks overlapped for all AEDs but pregabalin, which demonstrated significantly lower efficacy than lacosamide, perampanel, and topiramate. Moreover, there was a nonsignificant trend toward a lower relative risk of responder rate for SGTCS than for all seizure types, which appeared related to a greater response to placebo for this outcome.
Significance: Indirect comparison of AEDs using randomized placebo-controlled add-on trials does not support robust differences between AEDs to prevent SGTCS. Alternative designs for evaluation of therapeutic interventions in patients at risk for SGTCS-related complications are required.
Keywords: Antiepileptic drugs; Epilepsy; Generalized tonic-clonic seizures; Meta-analysis; Sudden unexpected death in epilepsy.
Wiley Periodicals, Inc. © 2014 International League Against Epilepsy.