ArticleClinical drug investigation2015
Early add-on lacosamide in a real-life setting: results of the REALLY study.
Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Movement disorders associated with antiseizure medications: A systematic review.Epilepsy & behavior : E&B · 2022Pooled it
- Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Lacosamide as an Adjunctive Treatment in Adults With Refractory Epilepsy.Frontiers in neurology · 2021Pooled it
- Efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive lacosamide in pediatric patients with focal seizures.Neurology · 2019Trial
- Bistromathics in Epilepsy and the Relativity of Numbers.CNS drugs · 2026Article
- Real-world retention of newer ASMs, including lacosamide and brivaracetam as first or second therapies in adult-onset epilepsy.Epilepsia · 2025Article
- Real-world anti-seizure treatment and adverse events among individuals living with drug-resistant focal epilepsy in the United States.Epilepsia open · 2024Article
- Comparative safety analysis of lacosamide and perampanel in epilepsy management: insights from FAERS database.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Safety and Tolerability of Lacosamide in Patients With Epilepsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2021Article
- Changes in drug load during lacosamide combination therapy: A noninterventional, observational study in German and Austrian clinical practice.Epilepsia open · 2019Article
- Lacosamide monotherapy in clinical practice: A retrospective chart review.Acta neurologica Scandinavica · 2018Article
- Review
- Adjunctive lacosamide treatment for adult focal-onset epilepsy: focus on comorbid intellectual/developmental disorders and differing responses.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2018Article
- Observational
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesMany patients with epilepsy are treated with antiepileptic drug (AED) polytherapy. Several factors influence the choice of early add-on therapy, and deciding on the most appropriate drug can be difficult. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of lacosamide as early add-on therapy in patients with partial-onset seizures.
methodsREALLY (REtrospective study of lAcosamide as earLy add-on aLong one Year) was a multicenter, retrospective, 1-year, real-life study. Patients included were aged older than 16 years, had partial-onset seizures, and were treated with lacosamide as add-on therapy after one or two prior AEDs. Data were collected retrospectively from clinical records. The primary study objective was to assess the efficacy of lacosamide over 12 months (seizure-free and responder rates), and the secondary objective was to assess the tolerability of lacosamide at 3, 6, and 12 months [adverse events (AEs) and discontinuation].
resultsOne hundred and ninety-nine patients were enrolled in the study; 89 patients (44.7 %) had tried one AED and 110 patients (55.3 %) had tried two AEDs before lacosamide. At 12 months, the proportion of patients who were seizure free was 44.9 %, and 76 % of patients were responders. The seizure-free rate at 12 months for patients who had previously received one or two AEDs was 58 and 34.3 %, and the responder rate at 12 months was 83.0 and 70.4 %, respectively. The AE rate was 21.5 % at 3 months, 27.1 % at 6 months, and 31.2 % at 12 months, with 7.0 % of patients discontinuing treatment because of an AE. The most common AE reported was dizziness (11.6 %). Cryptogenic epilepsy, a higher number of prior AEDs, and the use of a sodium channel blocker at onset were associated with a worse outcome. The number of concomitant AEDs decreased over 1 year (Z = 5.89; p < 0.001). Twenty-two patients were converted to lacosamide monotherapy with at least one evaluation ≥6 months from the beginning of monotherapy conversion.
conclusionsLacosamide was effective and well tolerated as early add-on treatment in patients who had received one or two previous AEDs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25488477What OpenQuestion holds
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.