Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24915838›Full record

Trial reportEpilepsia2014

Conversion to lacosamide monotherapy in the treatment of focal epilepsy: results from a historical-controlled, multicenter, double-blind study.

Robert T Wechsler, George Li, Jacqueline French, Terence J O'Brien, O'Neill D'Cruz, Paulette Williams, Robin Goodson, Melissa Brock, ALEX-MT Study Group

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Epilepsia, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00520741 (A Historical-controlled, Multicenter, Double-blind, Randomized Trial to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of Conversion to Lacosamide 400 mg/Day Monotherapy in Subjects With Partial-onset Seizures), which is not on this map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT00520741 phase3completednot on this map

A Historical-controlled, Multicenter, Double-blind, Randomized Trial to Assess the Efficacy and Safety of Conversion to Lacosamide 400 mg/Day Monotherapy in Subjects With Partial-onset Seizures

TypeinterventionalSponsorUCB BIOSCIENCES, Inc.Ran2007 to 2012Enrolled426ConditionsEpilepsyArmsLacosamide
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Efficacy and tolerability of antiseizure drugs.Therapeutic advances in neurological disorders · 2021
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Robert T WechslerConsultants in Epilepsy and Neurology, PLLC, Boise, Idaho, U.S.A.
George Li
Jacqueline French
Terence J O'Brien
O'Neill D'Cruz
Paulette Williams
Robin Goodson
Melissa Brock
ALEX-MT Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of conversion to lacosamide 400 mg/day monotherapy in adults with focal epilepsy.

methodsThis historical-controlled, double-blind study (NCT00520741) enrolled patients aged 16-70 years on stable doses of 1-2 antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) and experiencing 2-40 partial-onset seizures per 28 days during the 8-week prospective Baseline. Patients were randomized to lacosamide 400 or 300 mg/day (3:1 ratio), starting at 200 mg/day and titrated over 3 weeks to randomized dose. Patients then withdrew background AEDs over 6 weeks and entered a 10-week Monotherapy Phase. The primary assessment was the Kaplan-Meier-predicted percentage of patients on 400 mg/day in the full analysis set (FAS) meeting ≥ 1 predefined seizure-related exit criterion by day 112, compared with the historical-control threshold (65.3%).

resultsFour hundred twenty-five patients were enrolled and were eligible for safety analyses (400 mg/day, n = 319; 300 mg/day, n = 106). A total of 271 (63.8%) of 425 patients completed the Lacosamide Maintenance Phase (combined AED Withdrawal and Monotherapy Phases). Among 284 patients in the 400 mg/day group in the FAS, 82 (28.9%) met ≥ 1 exit criterion; the Kaplan-Meier-predicted exit percentage at day 112 for 400 mg/day (30.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 24.6-35.5%) was lower than the historical control. When exit events, withdrawal due to treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and withdrawal due to lack of efficacy were summed (n = 90), the predicted exit percentage (32.3%; 95% CI 26.8-37.8%) was also lower than the historical control. Most patients receiving 400 mg/day reported some improvement on the Clinical Global Impression of Change (75.4%) and Patient Global Impression of Change (74.3%). Overall, the most common (>10%) TEAEs were dizziness (24.0%), headache (14.4%), nausea (13.4%), convulsion (11.5%), somnolence (10.4%), and fatigue (10.1%); most (74.1%) were mild-to-moderate in intensity. Seventy-two patients (16.9%) discontinued due to TEAEs. Seventeen patients (4%, all receiving 400 mg/day) experienced serious AEs. SIGNIFICANCE: Lacosamide 400 mg/day monotherapy was effective, with a favorable safety profile in patients with focal epilepsy.

Indexed as

AcetamidesAdolescentAdultAgedAnticonvulsantsDose-Response Relationship, DrugDouble-Blind MethodDrug Administration ScheduleEpilepsies, PartialFemaleHeadacheHumansLacosamideMaleMiddle AgedNauseaAcetamidesAnticonvulsantsLacosamideFocal epilepsyHistorical controlLacosamideMonotherapyPartial-onset seizures

Identifiers

PMID24915838
PMCPMC4477913

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.